Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google and Ambient Computing

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 106 posts

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#41

Post by gowld »

jacquesm wrote: post #20
icandoit wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that they have a "take the flag, but dont hold the ground if it isn't worth it" approach. Learn lots and fail fast. Smaller companies can find a niche for themselves in "we are basically X that google used to do". Let someone else make the market and create your marketing, right? Maximizing profits (and innovation) over time may mean closing something profitable now, and focusing on new potential profits. That…

I hate it. It means that I'll never be able to trust some new service they launch because (1) if I adopt it it will likely get killed and (2) even if they don't they are going to let it suffer a slow death. I'm more than happy to wait for years if I have to in case something develops accidental mass market traction in which case Google will likely support it long term. I wonder if Google realizes how much this works…

Why is Google the only acceptable vendor?

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#42

Post by ghgfhgfhn »

VikingCoder wrote: post #25
phkahler wrote: post #9

Google is failing to organize the world's information in a way that is useful to me. I wanted to look up how to split a NURBS surface in half. You know, the math behind computing the new point and weights. All I got was a bunch of stuff from CAD vendors talking about how to manipulate NURBS in their own tools. Since then, I've seen more of this trend. It's hard to find information about how anything works now because…

Splitting a NURBS surface "in half" is an insanely complicated operation, and the way you do it almost certainly depends on your intended use case. If you can't find a library (or engine) in your domain that has the operation, then you're kind of S.O.L., and have to start from first principles. I don't blame commercial results and SEO for this. It's not like you used to be able to see a menu of rich choices for this,…

Well. Ideally I would like an introduction to the mathematics manipulating nurbs surfaces at the top of the search results. That's not too much to ask is it?

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#43

Post by jlarocco »

VikingCoder wrote: post #25
phkahler wrote: post #9

Google is failing to organize the world's information in a way that is useful to me. I wanted to look up how to split a NURBS surface in half. You know, the math behind computing the new point and weights. All I got was a bunch of stuff from CAD vendors talking about how to manipulate NURBS in their own tools. Since then, I've seen more of this trend. It's hard to find information about how anything works now because…

Splitting a NURBS surface "in half" is an insanely complicated operation, and the way you do it almost certainly depends on your intended use case. If you can't find a library (or engine) in your domain that has the operation, then you're kind of S.O.L., and have to start from first principles. I don't blame commercial results and SEO for this. It's not like you used to be able to see a menu of rich choices for this,…

> Splitting a NURBS surface "in half" is an insanely complicated operation, and the way you do it almost certainly depends on your intended use case.

It's actually not "insanely complicated", and there are resources around, like https://pages.mtu.edu/~shene/COURSES/cs3621/NOTES/spline/NUR... and https://www.amazon.com/NURBS-Book-Monographs-Visual-Communic...

> It's not like you used to be able to see a menu of rich choices for this, and now they're lost in the noise of companies with a mission.

I mentioned just yesterday that DDG results are better for me, and this case is an example. "NURBs splitting algorithm" turns up a bunch of results.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#44

Post by gowld »

shadowgovt wrote: post #2

""" So “being helpful” is the company’s goal, not its mission statement. """ The goal derives from the mission statement; it's an implementation strategy for "universally accessible and useful."

But Google isn't making iformation "universally accessible and useful" anymore. Now they are "slurping up all the information in the universe, and doling out in controlled ways to maximize user engagement metrics and advertising revenue"

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#45

Post by Kiro »

People really hate Google here. Look at this thread and the other about Soli. Not a single positive comment about Google. No wonder Google engineers have stopped posting on HN. Maybe Google truly is evil but I fail to see it personally.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#46

Post by orteam »

mfer wrote: post #23
icandoit wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like the always-on surveillance either. But if people choose these products because the convenience is worth it in their estimation, revealed preferences and all that. Maybe this suggests a counter-product? An offline, all data is local, product opportunity. Who will build it?

> But if people choose these products because the convenience is worth it in their estimation, revealed preferences and all that. "is worth it" requires people to be fully aware of what's going on. I've described what some of these devices are doing based on product announcements, patents, investigative news stories, and that sort of thing. I've had numerous people tell me that I'm wrong. That they don't believe comp…

Seems a bit patronizing. People can actually make a conscious decision to prefer convenience over surrender of some privacy. Some people don't put shades or curtains on their windows.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#48

Post by jwhitlark »

Santosh83 wrote: post #26

> Our users tell us they find the Google Assistant to be smart, user-friendly, and reliable, and that’s so important for ambient technology. Interactions need to feel natural and intuitive. Here’s an example: if you want to listen to music, the experience should be the same whether you are in the kitchen, you are driving in your car, or hanging out with friends. No matter what you are doing, you should be able to jus…

I wonder if this feeling plays into the comfort of noun-verb over verb-noun that is being discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21271212

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#49

Post by ryukafalz »

joshuamorton wrote: post #32
yellow_postit wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad companies like Google tend to be winner take most markets. Thats why you see it referred to as the duopoly of Google and FB, together they have ~60% of the digital ad market.

This doesn't address the question: Why didn't something pop up and eat up the success left in the wake of a market Google left, like reader or inbox or wave?

I would guess because those products weren't profitable on their own. They were propped up by Google's massive advertising business.

Re: Google and Ambient Computing

#50

Post by jjoonathan »

orteam wrote: post #46
mfer wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But if people choose these products because the convenience is worth it in their estimation, revealed preferences and all that. "is worth it" requires people to be fully aware of what's going on. I've described what some of these devices are doing based on product announcements, patents, investigative news stories, and that sort of thing. I've had numerous people tell me that I'm wrong. That they don't believe comp…

Seems a bit patronizing. People can actually make a conscious decision to prefer convenience over surrender of some privacy. Some people don't put shades or curtains on their windows.

Sure, but people generally understand how window shades work, whereas people generally don't understand how the surveillance economy works. That would be a patronizing assumption inside HN, but outside HN it's a reality that I regularly observe.
Post reply on HN