About Scott Cleland
![]() |
|
You are hereConflict of InterestGoogle humor: "human review trumps technology" in filtering for copyrightSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2008-01-31 10:48I had to stop myself from bursting out laughing when listening to Google-YouTube's product counsel, Mia Garlick, speak on the Internet Caucus panel on "Internet Copyright Filters: Finding the Balance."
Let that little quote sink in for a moment. Google...
If human review of content trumps technology, why doesn't Google rank/filter all the world's content in its search process with human review rather than technology -- if human review is better? Google's Regulatory Outlook 2008Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2008-01-18 18:33The big question for investors is why?
Google's Regulatory Outlook: Federal Trade Commission: Antitrust: Google co-founder's professor warns of Google's "technical arrogance: The system cannot fail"Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2008-01-16 11:02Ken Auletta of the New Yorker discovered one of those rare window-into-the-soul insights about Google in his excellent in-depth expose on Google: "The Search Party -- Google squares off with its Capitol Hill Critics." I strongly recommend reading the full article but it's critical not to miss this insightful gem in Auletta's article quoted below: Wikipedia entry into search exposes Google's non-"open" searchSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2008-01-07 10:57Wikipedia's late entry into the search business is reportedly motivated by concern that Google's search is not "open" and that too few players will control access to the world's information as "gatekeepers." As the New York Times reports in "Wiki citizens taking on a new area: search," Jimmy Wales, founder of the collaborative Wikipedia, is concerned about how closed and concentrated the search business has become.
It is ironic that Google, which purports to be the high priest of openness, is considered closed by the leading open and collaborative brand and phenomenon in the world -- wikipedia. Google jet's special NASA parking privileges -- Where's NASA's Inspector General on this?Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2008-01-04 10:59NBC11.com of San Jose posted an interesting reminder about Google's unique, highly suspect, and special deal with NASA, in which Google's founders get special parking privileges for their 767 "party plane" at NASA's Moffet Field, which is conveniently located just seven miles from Google's Silicon Valley headquarters. Where is NASA's Inspector General on this? Is Google recording you without your permission? Google's clandestine voiceprint database...Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-12-19 16:43Just when I have thought I have heard it all about Google thinking that the normal rules of ethical behavior simply don't apply to Google -- they come up with another of their heralded "innovations without permission" that just leaves me shaking my head in disbelief. ParisLemon.com has a great post: "Goog-411 is the Ultimate in Ulterior Motives: its really about getting voice samples from you."
Aren't we all familiar with the phone disclosure recording when we call a company that informs us that "this phone call is being recorded for training or quality assurance purposes"?
It only confirms a Google trait that I have driven home before that Google has no adult supervision or internal controls to speak of. "Google Knols Best?" or should we say: "serfing" for Google?" yes "serfing" with an "e"Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-12-17 19:24Google's latest business move to create "knols" should be sending shivers down the spine of any cognizant content publisher that cares about the future economics or growth of their online content.
Engineers: P2P is not "fair" usage; Reverse Robin Hood: Bandwidth rich steal from bandwidth poorSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2007-12-09 22:28Three times a year the Internet Engineering Task Force meets to discuss and work through major Internet issues.
The paper and the article point out that users of "unattended" P2P applications use dramatically more bandwidth than users of "interactive" applications like web browsing -- and then poses the question of whether this excess usage is fair. Van Beijnum points out that the paper's authors suggest that P2P users are using 500 times the bandwidth as average interactive users. Moreover, he points out that this assymetric bandwidth dynamic disincents an ISP from upgrading their network because the assymetry would make them even less competitive. The fundamental point here is a question of fairness. Busted again! Google ranked worst in "One World Trust" survey on openness and transparencySubmitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-12-04 10:46The Financial Times reported that One World Trust is publishing the results of a new world survey that ranks Google worst in the world on openness and transparency.
One World Trust "conducts research on practical ways to make global organisations more responsive to the people they affect, and on how the rule of law can be applied equally to all. It educates political leaders and opinion-formers about the findings of its research."
It is good to get additional third party confirmation of many of the themes I have been blogging about for over a year and a half on Google. How Principled is Google about free speech when it opposes the "Global Online Freedom Act"?Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-12-03 12:16An editorial by the New York Times on free speech points out that Google and other big Internet companies in fact oppose legislation that promotes free speech for those who most need it around the world.
It seems all this Google-funded effort to cloak net neutrality as a "freedom of speech" issue by Moveon.org, FreePress, Public Knowledge and other Google-supported pressure groups, is just a cynical tactic and political ploy because Google actually opposes free speech when the rubber meets the road -- like with the "Global Online Freedom Act."
Pages |