The Cluny did attract smart people and was fast growing and profitable. This, however, was in large part due to donations and endowments making it a charity an

The Cluny did attract smart people and was fast growing and profitable. This, however, was in large part due to donations and endowments making it a charity and not a business and much of the wealth obtained by the Cluny was a direct result of state conquest as their greatest patrons were kings and royals. Another reason for its rapid growth was the fact that subordinate houses (priories) were given the same privileges of having no secular obligations (by Pope Benedict VIII). This caused many already established abbeys, of the Benedictine order, to associate themselves as Cluniac houses. This differs entirely from the growth of Google who received no special privileges from any governing bodies and relied upon a superior technology for success. There is a tenable connection in the fact that a great deal of resources in Benedictine monasteries (not just Cluny) were used to collect, catalog and preserve information (mostly in libraries). The Cluny Abbey itself had what some consider to be one of the best libraries in Europe at the time. A statement of the form "x is like y" is an invitation to consider similarities between them, it's also an invitation to consider their differences, which in this case out way the similarities. As stated before, why is it necessary to compare the Cluny with Google? The Cluny is an interesting and important topic on its own. Perhaps the reason to compare it was to add sensation to the headline or so that the 'this is off topic kiddies' on YC News don't cry foul, but either way, not necessary.