301–310 of 445 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's flagship product is a box that you can type words into, and get relevant texts/references/facts in response. It seems like a textbook example of AI.
Google's flagship product is an advertising platform, not a search box.
It's interesting to that it took this long, just considering the utility of each company. If Apple disappeared tomorrow I'd be moderately inconvenienced, I'd have to pick up an Android handset instead of my iPhone and maybe set up some new podcast feeds. If Google disappeared the world would screech to a halt.
Eh. People would use Bing. But if Microsoft disappeared the business world would grind to a halt, and with it the rest of the economy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "other bets" that are (in aggregate) losing money are things that Alphabet does that are not part of Google. While Google is nearly 100% advertising revenue, it has non-advertising revenue streams inside of Google. And we only know that the "other bets" (non-Google Alphabet operations) are losing money in aggregate , not that all of them are losing money individually .
We do know more: Ruth Porat basically said that Nest, Fiber, and Verily (formerly Google Life Sciences, and where I work) are making money.
Paid clicks up 31% overall, on Google’s own sites, up 40%. That's a bit concerning to me, especially when you consider: a) That growth is outpacing internet traffic growth, and has for many years now. Internet traffic CAGR is 23%[1] b) The shift from desktop to mobile should have the effect of reducing clicks. c) Since some of the growth is video, I would expect a decrease in click growth related to this as well. Vid…
b) You'd think this. From what I've seen, mobile ads have up to 4x higher CTR with a as much as a 30% lower CVR. This is from multiple high spend accounts I have managed. Fat finger misclicks? Mobile ad "cards" also look almost identical to the organic result cards.
Google used to roll major updates all of the time, now they come within 2 weeks of earnings releases, fairly consistently. Look for them to continue manipulate their black box (quality score) to help inflate CPCs, blend paid ads into organic (a la Baidu), reduce the number of organic results per page, increase the prominence of Shopping campaigns, remove advertiser control (no true exact match, or no exact match at all?) and generally try to squeeze SMBs by reducing organic visibility and subtly suggesting to try AdWords. Google's advertising business is at odds with providing the highest quality search results. They aren't really innovating in search, they're just turning dials to increase their earnings per mille for ads displayed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI is whatever hasn't been done yet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect#AI_is_whatever_hasn....
Precisely. The image recognition and natural language processing that's "just a deep learning algorithm" today would have blown the socks off anyone ten years ago. Chess playing programs were AI until they could decisively beat all humans, and then we decided that chess doesn't require intelligence. Self-driving cars were AI until they got close to market and now apparently driving a car doesn't require intelligence.…
To put it another way, if we define a Scotsman as anyone born in Scotland and/or related to someone born in Scotland, we've essentially just defined a Scotsman as every organism ever to be alive on Earth.
I have to imagine when the term first started to be used people imagined an AI as something more human than neural networks. Imagine HAL or any other hollywood perceived robot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The text ad which is targeted using AI?
No, the text ad which is targeted (crudely) using tons of data and some statistical methods. It ain't gonna pass the Turing test anytime soon, and it's not more of an "AI" product any other product with basic algorithmic based matching is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Need to combine Google/Alphabet share classes.
No, the reported market cap on Finance already does that; the after-hours trading explanation seems the better explanation.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/02/01/alphabet-...
Please note:https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOGL and https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOG
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's flagship product is an advertising platform, not a search box.
And Apple's flagship product, and responsible for the majority of their income, is a phone trinket made in China.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's flagship product is a box that you can type words into, and get relevant texts/references/facts in response. It seems like a textbook example of AI.
AI is whatever hasn't been done yet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect#AI_is_whatever_hasn....
This concept seems to be a direct abstraction of hindsight bias.
In fact, the concept of hindsight bias feels very much like every aspect of life, also. As soon as you build the next great tower, you opt for a new wave of bigger, more powerful enemies (i.e., you level up), and so the solution for the last wave no longer feels that interesting anymore, and thus seems, perhaps, obvious.
The comparisons between Google and Apple aren't as apples-to-apples as everyone in the media seems to think. If we're talking about the future of these companies, and their earning power, they are situating themselves very differently. Apple is really a consumer electronics company, Google is an artificial intelligence company. And investors think more money will be in the future of AI instead of consumer hardware an…
I absolutely agree that comparing Google and apple is silly. But calling Google an "artificial intelligence" company is just feeding another buzzword into the fire.
“Oh, we’re really making an AI.” -Larry Page [0]
[0] http://www.wired.com/2014/10/future-of-artificial-intelligen...