391–400 of 445 posts
Apple Marketcap: $539B
Google Marketcap: $537B
Microsoft Marketcap: $435B
Facebook Marketcap: $320B
Total of these big 4: $1.8 Trillion
Who said the bubble is going to burst this year?
So let's see, according to Google Finance. Not quite accurate number, only a few billions more or less. Apple Marketcap: $539B Google Marketcap: $537B Microsoft Marketcap: $435B Facebook Marketcap: $320B Total of these big 4: $1.8 Trillion Who said the bubble is going to burst this year?
Well, abusing their search dominance among other things like making ads indistinguishable from organic results and paid placement on verticals like shopping/hotels etc. was eventually going to pay out. More details on how Google manipulated search rankings manually to make more money: From http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-skewed-search-results... >A previously undisclosed report by staffers at the Federal Trade…
Google's purpose is to give users the most relevant results. No Google algorithm update goes through without users liking it; it doesn't matter how much profitability it increases.
No. Google's purpose is to extract as much money as possible from advertisers. In other words, they find the most stupid and desperate scum willing to pay the most per whatever (i.e. "10x growth hackers"), then separate them from their wallets.
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.
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…
Google makes money from that crazy amount of information they have available, albeit we must admit that thus far, they haven't been able to turn a real business from most of it: the real profitable way they use that knowledge is to serve us ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.…
A computer running a chess program isn't intelligent because it isn't sentient. It is just doing what it's been told to.
What people want to see is artificial general intelligence, currently that is not possible.
Does running human software on biological hardware make it sentient, or would the same be true on other forms of hardware?
That hardware is just doing what it's been told to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A computer running a chess program isn't intelligent because it isn't sentient. It is just doing what it's been told to.
Yeah, and sentience is a completely made up human thing by which we differentiate betweem ourselves and other non-human animals. What people want to see is artificial general intelligence, currently that is not possible. Does running human software on biological hardware make it sentient, or would the same be true on other forms of hardware? That hardware is just doing what it's been told to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.…
The problem with calling anything AI is that it's such a meaningless word in the context of computers. According to Wikipedia AI is "intelligence exhibited by machines or software" and Merriam Webster define intelligence as "the ability to learn" so I'd say we hit AI long ago. I'd follow the meaning further but I hate arguing definitions. To put it another way, if we define a Scotsman as anyone born in Scotland and/o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's flagship product is an advertising platform, not a search box.
This is an annoying meme. Are concession stands the flagship product of movie theaters? People use Google for search, email, maps, etc. And that's what the company was built for. If they had a better way to monetize than ads, they would certainly drop ads.
Actually, yeah. I worked in cinema (as a projectionist) before getting into tech, and the management definitely saw the food counter as more important than the movies being shown.
The place was run like a fast-food restaurant.