4 ms·

> GOOG, FB, AMZN A tiny nitpick, but what's with the trend of using stock symbols in non-financial context? GOOGL isn't much shorter than Google, same with AMZ

by gedrap 9y ago

> GOOG, FB, AMZN A tiny nitpick, but what's with the trend of using stock symbols in non-financial context? GOOGL isn't much shorter than Google, same with AMZN and Amazon. It just looks... annoyingly out of place. Regarding the article itself, the topic of Facebook/Amazon/Google domination is much spoken and written about and this post doesn't really add much new. This issue is well known for a quite a long time, especially in the HN and similar social circles. What most of the posts are missing is how do we escape this? But that might be too late.

convery 9y ago
Because there's a lot of longer ones and it becomes a habit. For example I often talk about ATVI (Activision-Blizzard) in chats as it's a lot shorter.
- johnchristopher 9y ago
  "in chats". This is a blog post, a forum, not an SMS conversation with 1998's prices. Acronyms look-up on Google gets old really fast. I had to look for YANBU yesterday and it was not fun to get back to the orignal text after that.
- DougN7 9y ago
  I would never have guessed what ATVI was. So audience is important, which means for a public post, stock symbols probably aren't a great idea.
  - koko775 9y ago
    It's the first result not only on Google but DuckDuckGo as well. Do you not search for unfamiliar terms?
    - DougN7 9y ago
      Sure I do. But if one has an aim to be understood, it's better not to make everyone lookup what you're referring to. If something has a well known name, use the name!
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
I tend to think it is passive aggressiveness[0]. Especially in articles like this. [0] "Look! these are the large organizations ruining everything!"
zukzuk 9y ago
A not-so-subtle way of pointing out that these are all profit-seeking companies? A lot like how people used to write Micro$oft, back when Bill Gates was the nerds' devil. We're all sophisticated financially-aware grown ups now, so we've moved on to ticker symbols, as a way of signalling our enlightenment.
- mc32 9y ago
  I tend to agree. It's a way to signal that one is above the everyman and everywoman who don't indulge in the cants and argots that abound in the industry. On average, when people can, they do try to sound more sophisticated than necessary to express a message, including in this message.
- bitwize 9y ago
  Just the opposite. It actually started in the 90s during the dotcom mania when what a company was doing, for good or ill, became eclipsed by how much money its stock could make the reader base. Ostensible tech sites turned into The Wall Street Journal. During the early 90s it was "Microsoft announces a new version of Windows. Here are the features you can look forward to (or dread)!" The late 90s turned more toward "Microsoft (MSFT) experienced a stock price jump when it announced a new version of Windows."
exDM69 9y ago
I think the author uses GOOG to distinguish GOOG the company from Google, the service they provide.
- jannes 9y ago
  Technically GOOG doesn't even stand for Google Inc. anymore. It's Alphabet Inc.'s official ticker symbol. Subtle difference.
lemondrops 9y ago
> annoyingly out of place Agree. I can't take an article seriously when the author is too lazy to type out Facebook.

by gedrap 9y ago

convery 9y ago

Because there's a lot of longer ones and it becomes a habit. For example I often talk about ATVI (Activision-Blizzard) in chats as it's a lot shorter.

johnchristopher 9y ago
"in chats". This is a blog post, a forum, not an SMS conversation with 1998's prices. Acronyms look-up on Google gets old really fast. I had to look for YANBU yesterday and it was not fun to get back to the orignal text after that.
DougN7 9y ago
I would never have guessed what ATVI was. So audience is important, which means for a public post, stock symbols probably aren't a great idea.
- koko775 9y ago
  It's the first result not only on Google but DuckDuckGo as well. Do you not search for unfamiliar terms?
  - DougN7 9y ago
    Sure I do. But if one has an aim to be understood, it's better not to make everyone lookup what you're referring to. If something has a well known name, use the name!

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

I tend to think it is passive aggressiveness[0]. Especially in articles like this. [0] "Look! these are the large organizations ruining everything!"

zukzuk 9y ago

A not-so-subtle way of pointing out that these are all profit-seeking companies? A lot like how people used to write Micro$oft, back when Bill Gates was the nerds' devil. We're all sophisticated financially-aware grown ups now, so we've moved on to ticker symbols, as a way of signalling our enlightenment.

mc32 9y ago
I tend to agree. It's a way to signal that one is above the everyman and everywoman who don't indulge in the cants and argots that abound in the industry. On average, when people can, they do try to sound more sophisticated than necessary to express a message, including in this message.
bitwize 9y ago
Just the opposite. It actually started in the 90s during the dotcom mania when what a company was doing, for good or ill, became eclipsed by how much money its stock could make the reader base. Ostensible tech sites turned into The Wall Street Journal. During the early 90s it was "Microsoft announces a new version of Windows. Here are the features you can look forward to (or dread)!" The late 90s turned more toward "Microsoft (MSFT) experienced a stock price jump when it announced a new version of Windows."

exDM69 9y ago

I think the author uses GOOG to distinguish GOOG the company from Google, the service they provide.

jannes 9y ago
Technically GOOG doesn't even stand for Google Inc. anymore. It's Alphabet Inc.'s official ticker symbol. Subtle difference.

lemondrops 9y ago

> annoyingly out of place Agree. I can't take an article seriously when the author is too lazy to type out Facebook.