Okay, for the most part, most of us alive today are older than Google and remember it began around 1998, but someday... everyone alive is going to be younger than Google, and there's going to be no one alive that even remembers when Google was founded, and everyone alive is going to use Google as like its Skynet.
Heck, a lot of kids today don't know what the world was like without smartphones and tablets, and it seems like it was just yesterday that these were adopted en masse.
I'd argue it should be every responsible person's goal to ensure that doesn't happen. Or that as a monopoly, it gets nationalized and turned into a public service. Or broken into chunks.
Who else remembers the first time they visited google.com?
I was on a 56k dial up connection, but the page loaded so quickly.
This was during a period I was used to pages taking 20+ seconds to load, and the google homepage loaded almost instantly.
In fact, just for fun, I went to google.com on my new laptop with ssd and 16 gig of ram using the latest version of chrome, and maybe it is through rose tinted glasses, but it seems like the first time I visited google using my dial up connection it loaded a lot "snappier" than it does today.
Most if not all the ISP companies in my home country used to ask you to access google.com while troubleshooting connectivity issues. They would eventually assume your Internet was working as expected if at least Google loaded. Recently they changed the strategy and now use Internet speed tester which come with the requirement to have Flash installed and enabled.
Many people in my country still believe that Google == Internet so I am pretty sure that if Google stops serving for whatever reason here the majority of people will get cut out of the Internet because they don't understand how to use the address bar. I have even seen people accessing google.com just to put facebook.com in the search form instead of simply typing that domain in the address bar, I cringe every time.
A little off-topic but in 2011 I had an Asus Eee PC with a super slow processor and like 2GB of RAM (later 4). While the tiny screen sucked, I used to chat on Facebook, watch YouTube, post on Tumblr, etc with no problem.
Now plenty of websites make my Macbook's fans start.
I was in 7th grade when my teacher recommended a few search engines to our class. I had been using Alta Vista up until that time, and I noticed right away that Google's results were somehow better...
Anyway, Google's pretty snappy for me just now, and I'm on a so-so connection.
I remember when I discovered Google. Suddenly class research papers became so much easier. Google results were just so good and so fast. I remember almost having a hipster sense of superiority when I learned that someone was using Yahoo or Alta Vista and had never heard of Google. I felt like it was my secret weapon.
I don't have a clear memory of when I first visited Google, but I do remember using going from Alta Vista to Metacrawler, until gradually (still rather quickly) Google ended up consistently yielding good enough results that Metacrawler became redundant.
The AltaVista search engine most powerful operator was NEAR, it helped you to rank the results until Google came to the scene. Google much later added the * and proximity operators [1].
I'd never really considered it before, but Google is pretty old now in internet terms. It's been around twice along as some of its fellow giants like Facebook (2004), YouTube (2005), Twitter (2006) and the like - although not nearly as long as Yahoo! (1994) and AOL (1991).
What's impressive is not that that it's one of the oldest internet companies around, but that it's still relevant today! The vast majority of large internet companies usually fade into obscurity in less than ten years as they fail to change and adapt and are replaced by whatever is new and shiny at the time; Google though, they knew they had to place bold bets beyond what's making money today, and that paid off beautifully.
Great to see Google splintering off into single duty compartments instead of spreading itself so thin that nothing gets done with the same amount of focus. Alphabet was a true design decision, and a mature one at that. One thing that crossed my mind recently was the notion of Google and its long relationship with hardware: we have this thing called the Blockchain now, and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware. It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance. I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it. I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google. Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish.
Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?
> One thing that crossed my mind recently was the notion of Google and its long relationship with hardware: we have this thing called the Blockchain now, and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware.
I was under the impression that most mining is now done by a few groups using special purpose hardware. Mining using hardware bought with "pocket money" seems like a losing game at this point.
> It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance.
It makes me sad that so much energy is wasted computing hashes for mining when it seems to add so little to society. In comparison, I think hosting holiday photos is a more valuable task.
> I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it.
I'm not sure why Google would give their hardware to a random group of miners. I'm not sure why the miners would want it either since x86 is not an efficient way to mine. Out of date x86 hardware especially.
A “blockchain” is a type of distributed data structure, there's not just The Blockchain, unless you're specifically talking about Bitcoin, in which case I don't know why you wouldn't refer to it specifically.
> and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware.
You're either suggesting that Google run Bitcoin nodes in their datacentres (which defeats Bitcoin's decentralisation), or that Google should make hardware specifically for Bitcoin.
Given Google is all about centralised, non-anonymised data they can mine for ad targeting, what exactly would appeal to them about Bitcoin?
> It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance.
Sure, there might be better uses for some of Google's servers, arguably, but why would “changing the direction of finance” require that? Aren't proposals like Bitcoin usually based on decentralisation?
> I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it.
Why would Google give away free servers to Bitcoin enthusiasts? What possible business incentive could there be? If they're just being nice, then why to Bitcoiners, of all people? Bitcoin (and systems using the same proof-of-work chain design) is an extremely wasteful user of energy and would not put such systems to good use.
> I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google.
Much more likely that Google would simply close its online services on you without a token of gratitude to its users.
> Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish.
You're forgetting the astronomical energy requirements for Bitcoin mining.
> Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?
Post-Snowden, pro-privacy services are essentially the antithesis of Google's business model. If Google can't read your chats, they can't scan them for keywords.
Almost everything I've ever learned started with a Google search. I'm 30 now - I started using it when I was 15 - and since I didn't have a lot of friends or stuff happening growing up, I spent hours browsing. A lot of porn, but also a lot of random stuff I was curious about. I kind of stopped believing the words of people around me and chose to believe everything I read instead. Over time I did develop a better sense of what's credible and what's not.
By the way I've always had the idea of a credibility plugin to a browser that rates the credibility level of everything you visit.
Sometimes I judge someone based on how they search. If they're typing out a whole question, perfect punctuation: not a good sign.
I was a bit late to the Google party. I first heard about it when I was in my CS seminar in undergrad. Someone in class talked about a cool new search engine called "googol" (what I thought it was called). I am not sure when but slowly I ditched Yahoo!, AltaVista, and Ask Jeeves in favor of it and never looked back. Each time I try alt search engines like Bing or DDG I keep coming back.
The second big Google moment I remember was when Gmail first came out. I wanted an invite so bad and eventually got one. I thought how cool is this that you can have a usable email client in the web browser. Not that it was the first one; I remember using Hotmail before that. But it had threaded messages!
Of all the tech companies I've used in the past Google has treated me the best. They've done some unforgivable things like killing Google Reader but for the most part I'm happy with them.
the death of google reader was sad, but at the same time, RSS as a method of reading blogs and news has exited the building. Competing products have failed to provide the same kind of mindshare that reader apparently had. Social media has taken over, for better and worse.
The internet has changed, and reader is one of those things that is solidly in the past.
The first time I visited Google.com was at a startup called European Artisans in Rome, Italy, using a Flower Power iMac G3. I was reading a book called The Cluetrain Manifesto at the time and remember thinking that Google 'got' what the [internet][1] is and where it was was going. And despite some missteps, they still do!
Looking forward to the next 18 years! Happy birthday, Google!
I think there are always at least five news articles written on any topic that is mentioned in a Google Doodle because those are really the simplest clicks you can get with so much traffic coming from Google. (They often get shown under the "news" segment)
Today: Google is the new MS. XMPP kicked out of Google Talk, RSS put on a hold. If there wasn't Firefox, Chromium would be burried. I'd even wish that Bing would be more successful, let alone DuckDuckGo.
I have some sympathy with this but I think people ignore a lot of the stuff which Google just gives away with some fairly light advertising. Think about navigating with Apple maps, or trying to organise your life with Hotmail or trying to do anything without Google search. Some of their product decisions wind people up but I think they do a lot more good than harm.
Choosing not to do everything you consider good does not make one evil. You're going to have to work a little harder to demonstrate that "Google is the new MS".
The problem is that Googlers live and work and are friends with other Googlers, and have a massive echo chamber effect. Most of the people who Googlers interact with are either Google employees or Google enthusiasts, so it's easy for them to believe that something like the comments on this article are some sort of concentrated effort by a small group or something, as opposed to a very real, widespread concern.
I remember using Google for the first time in college. It was like a breath of fresh air after using Yahoo, Northern Light or any of the other search engines back in the day.
I'm part of the Google economy now for 12 years, so well thank you Google, kinda.
My story for all who are interested:
In 2004 the director of the Austria Press Agency (APA) came to me and said "Hey, our PR customers wan't to find their press releases in Google, do that!" I was in web business development then, a fancy name for a one man team of developer, coder, hacker, sysadmin, product development, cooperations, conceptionist, designer, data analyst, external contributors coordinator for www.ots.at, the public relations branch of APA.
I did, and it worked. As a matter of fact it worked so good, that for some time the press releases of the companies showed up before the actual websites of the companies. (I used such advanced and then highly controversial strategies like internal interlinking and title-tags) Traffic and soon later revenue exploded.
As I was frustrated with web development at that time (IE6 had a market share of 90% plus, FF (firebird or phoenix at that time) wasn't ready yet, no competition anywhere near). Web 2.0. was just starting at that time, we saw what was possible, but we could not do it, as the IE6 bugs were crashing all innovation.
I could code since I was a child, then I made code my work, now I swore to myself that I will always ever code for fun (or projects that are 100% owned by me and therefore fun) again, but earn money in another way.
I followed the money and started my first company "Search Engine Optimized distribution of PR and Corporate Information via Blog and Web 2.0. Networks" in 2006 i think. Today we would call it a "Corporate Blog"!
I created a piece of software that was from the front end better than WordPress of that time, faster, bug free HTML, W3C valid, beautiful tag clouds, just awesome. The backend and the actual getting content in there was a complete mess, so what, I had a product!!!! Now I just needed to sell the product, cold calling companies and convince them that they need a corporate blog and that their content needs to get found by Google. Oh yeah, zero sales experience from my side. Lets just say it didn't work.
So I did what any young founder would do: went to a party, jumped over a wall to save entrance fee, broke my knee in a very complicated way and went into hospital for 3 months.
I took a job again: This time as a key account manager to sell websites in the real estate business. I learned a lot, most horrible job ever, too.
Went to the next job, now officially called myself SEO for the first time: becoming the SEO manager of the then world leader in sports-betting, poker and casino. Oh what fun! For the first time I realized what unbelievable esoteric bullshit people started to believe about Google and SEO. High-up management talked about "PageRank Black Holes" whereby I explained to them that "Google being able to crawl us" is kinda a good idea if you want to get found for anything. Also I had months long projects to convince the powers to be, that it just isn't a good idea to run internal links over 16 (internal & external ) redirects (whereby IE which was still around at that time only supported 10...). I had 70 people working on changing the footer links (as they were owned by different departments and country managers). Learned a lot in those years, especially about working with consultants and other third parties brought in by country managers, product heads, other consultants, bought companies, ...
And I learned that the state of SEO, which was a dev driven discipline for a long time became the ultimate bullshit industry. With people selling links that suck, selling tools that nobody needs, telling stuff that could neither verified nor falsified, hurting businesses until the point of bankruptcy. And whenever I though SEO has arrived at a new bottom, it became worse.
Then I did what any employee which was fed up with the status quo did, I joined a startup. Well not one, an incubator which owned the majority of all the startups it incubated. I.e.: I helped scale 123people form about 300 000 monthly to 60 000 000 monthly visits before it was sold. And some others which I'm more proud of. Then joined another startup.
In 2011 I started my second company, my goal is simple: To make all SEO agencies, including my own, redundant. I'm doing great, it's still lots of fun.
So anyway, thx Google. You gave me a career. I work in the world/economy you created.
I don't quite like Google, but happy birthday Google :)
20+ years of being online. Google was a welcome change when they launched, but they've been on a path of slow credibility erosion for much of the last decade. IMHO.
[+] [-] mattbgates|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mahn|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] martin-adams|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] madeofpalk|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ocdtrekkie|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bfuller|9 years ago|reply
I was on a 56k dial up connection, but the page loaded so quickly.
This was during a period I was used to pages taking 20+ seconds to load, and the google homepage loaded almost instantly.
In fact, just for fun, I went to google.com on my new laptop with ssd and 16 gig of ram using the latest version of chrome, and maybe it is through rose tinted glasses, but it seems like the first time I visited google using my dial up connection it loaded a lot "snappier" than it does today.
[+] [-] guessmyname|9 years ago|reply
Many people in my country still believe that Google == Internet so I am pretty sure that if Google stops serving for whatever reason here the majority of people will get cut out of the Internet because they don't understand how to use the address bar. I have even seen people accessing google.com just to put facebook.com in the search form instead of simply typing that domain in the address bar, I cringe every time.
[+] [-] sotojuan|9 years ago|reply
Now plenty of websites make my Macbook's fans start.
[+] [-] CaptSpify|9 years ago|reply
http://aautar.digital-radiation.com/blog/uploaded_images/goo...
I think google's backend is starting to look like yahoo's front-end. IME, their sites are getting slow and bloated.
[+] [-] acobster|9 years ago|reply
Anyway, Google's pretty snappy for me just now, and I'm on a so-so connection.
[+] [-] importantbrian|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] e12e|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamespo|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jagermo|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yolesaber|9 years ago|reply
Hilariously enough, the site is up and running now and still offers pretty good results.
[+] [-] wslh|9 years ago|reply
[1] http://www.hbagency.com/every-google-search-operator-youll-e...
[+] [-] drdeadringer|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SmellyGeekBoy|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mahn|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zerognowl|9 years ago|reply
Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?
[+] [-] dpark|9 years ago|reply
I was under the impression that most mining is now done by a few groups using special purpose hardware. Mining using hardware bought with "pocket money" seems like a losing game at this point.
> It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance.
It makes me sad that so much energy is wasted computing hashes for mining when it seems to add so little to society. In comparison, I think hosting holiday photos is a more valuable task.
> I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it.
I'm not sure why Google would give their hardware to a random group of miners. I'm not sure why the miners would want it either since x86 is not an efficient way to mine. Out of date x86 hardware especially.
[+] [-] TazeTSchnitzel|9 years ago|reply
A “blockchain” is a type of distributed data structure, there's not just The Blockchain, unless you're specifically talking about Bitcoin, in which case I don't know why you wouldn't refer to it specifically.
> and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware.
You're either suggesting that Google run Bitcoin nodes in their datacentres (which defeats Bitcoin's decentralisation), or that Google should make hardware specifically for Bitcoin.
Given Google is all about centralised, non-anonymised data they can mine for ad targeting, what exactly would appeal to them about Bitcoin?
> It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance.
Sure, there might be better uses for some of Google's servers, arguably, but why would “changing the direction of finance” require that? Aren't proposals like Bitcoin usually based on decentralisation?
> I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it.
Why would Google give away free servers to Bitcoin enthusiasts? What possible business incentive could there be? If they're just being nice, then why to Bitcoiners, of all people? Bitcoin (and systems using the same proof-of-work chain design) is an extremely wasteful user of energy and would not put such systems to good use.
> I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google.
Much more likely that Google would simply close its online services on you without a token of gratitude to its users.
> Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish.
You're forgetting the astronomical energy requirements for Bitcoin mining.
> Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?
Post-Snowden, pro-privacy services are essentially the antithesis of Google's business model. If Google can't read your chats, they can't scan them for keywords.
[+] [-] the_common_man|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zargath|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cko|9 years ago|reply
By the way I've always had the idea of a credibility plugin to a browser that rates the credibility level of everything you visit.
Sometimes I judge someone based on how they search. If they're typing out a whole question, perfect punctuation: not a good sign.
[+] [-] Yhippa|9 years ago|reply
The second big Google moment I remember was when Gmail first came out. I wanted an invite so bad and eventually got one. I thought how cool is this that you can have a usable email client in the web browser. Not that it was the first one; I remember using Hotmail before that. But it had threaded messages!
Of all the tech companies I've used in the past Google has treated me the best. They've done some unforgivable things like killing Google Reader but for the most part I'm happy with them.
[+] [-] ryanobjc|9 years ago|reply
The internet has changed, and reader is one of those things that is solidly in the past.
[+] [-] hypertexthero|9 years ago|reply
Looking forward to the next 18 years! Happy birthday, Google!
[1]: http://www.worldofends.com/
[+] [-] laumars|9 years ago|reply
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...
[Title: When is Google’s birthday? The big thing wrong with the search engine's celebratory doodle]
[+] [-] chki|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] twblalock|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nachtigall|9 years ago|reply
Today: Google is the new MS. XMPP kicked out of Google Talk, RSS put on a hold. If there wasn't Firefox, Chromium would be burried. I'd even wish that Bing would be more successful, let alone DuckDuckGo.
[+] [-] domfletcher|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 0xmohit|9 years ago|reply
Today: All your data are belong to us.
[+] [-] tkinom|9 years ago|reply
Today: Feel the power of the dark side.
:-)
[+] [-] solipsism|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] EugeneOZ|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ocdtrekkie|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Sylos|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wiremine|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] amelius|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nommm-nommm|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] legopicode|9 years ago|reply
Now: An interner super power
Happy birthday
[+] [-] Mithaldu|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] franze|9 years ago|reply
My story for all who are interested:
In 2004 the director of the Austria Press Agency (APA) came to me and said "Hey, our PR customers wan't to find their press releases in Google, do that!" I was in web business development then, a fancy name for a one man team of developer, coder, hacker, sysadmin, product development, cooperations, conceptionist, designer, data analyst, external contributors coordinator for www.ots.at, the public relations branch of APA.
I did, and it worked. As a matter of fact it worked so good, that for some time the press releases of the companies showed up before the actual websites of the companies. (I used such advanced and then highly controversial strategies like internal interlinking and title-tags) Traffic and soon later revenue exploded.
As I was frustrated with web development at that time (IE6 had a market share of 90% plus, FF (firebird or phoenix at that time) wasn't ready yet, no competition anywhere near). Web 2.0. was just starting at that time, we saw what was possible, but we could not do it, as the IE6 bugs were crashing all innovation.
I could code since I was a child, then I made code my work, now I swore to myself that I will always ever code for fun (or projects that are 100% owned by me and therefore fun) again, but earn money in another way.
I followed the money and started my first company "Search Engine Optimized distribution of PR and Corporate Information via Blog and Web 2.0. Networks" in 2006 i think. Today we would call it a "Corporate Blog"!
I created a piece of software that was from the front end better than WordPress of that time, faster, bug free HTML, W3C valid, beautiful tag clouds, just awesome. The backend and the actual getting content in there was a complete mess, so what, I had a product!!!! Now I just needed to sell the product, cold calling companies and convince them that they need a corporate blog and that their content needs to get found by Google. Oh yeah, zero sales experience from my side. Lets just say it didn't work.
So I did what any young founder would do: went to a party, jumped over a wall to save entrance fee, broke my knee in a very complicated way and went into hospital for 3 months.
I took a job again: This time as a key account manager to sell websites in the real estate business. I learned a lot, most horrible job ever, too.
Went to the next job, now officially called myself SEO for the first time: becoming the SEO manager of the then world leader in sports-betting, poker and casino. Oh what fun! For the first time I realized what unbelievable esoteric bullshit people started to believe about Google and SEO. High-up management talked about "PageRank Black Holes" whereby I explained to them that "Google being able to crawl us" is kinda a good idea if you want to get found for anything. Also I had months long projects to convince the powers to be, that it just isn't a good idea to run internal links over 16 (internal & external ) redirects (whereby IE which was still around at that time only supported 10...). I had 70 people working on changing the footer links (as they were owned by different departments and country managers). Learned a lot in those years, especially about working with consultants and other third parties brought in by country managers, product heads, other consultants, bought companies, ...
And I learned that the state of SEO, which was a dev driven discipline for a long time became the ultimate bullshit industry. With people selling links that suck, selling tools that nobody needs, telling stuff that could neither verified nor falsified, hurting businesses until the point of bankruptcy. And whenever I though SEO has arrived at a new bottom, it became worse.
Then I did what any employee which was fed up with the status quo did, I joined a startup. Well not one, an incubator which owned the majority of all the startups it incubated. I.e.: I helped scale 123people form about 300 000 monthly to 60 000 000 monthly visits before it was sold. And some others which I'm more proud of. Then joined another startup.
In 2011 I started my second company, my goal is simple: To make all SEO agencies, including my own, redundant. I'm doing great, it's still lots of fun.
So anyway, thx Google. You gave me a career. I work in the world/economy you created.
[+] [-] amelius|9 years ago|reply
Interesting story. But in that last line you make it sound like without Google you didn't have a career :)
[+] [-] ksk|9 years ago|reply
20+ years of being online. Google was a welcome change when they launched, but they've been on a path of slow credibility erosion for much of the last decade. IMHO.
[+] [-] social_quotient|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] meira|9 years ago|reply