In the search game: Google 1, Librarians 0

Bob Cox hips us to this article from the Star-Telegram.

Librarians are being written off as pre-1996 search relics, unable to compete in an era of robotic search engines.


Google founders to set up charitable organization sends us news on Google's new charitable endeavors. From the article:

"According to Reuters the pair want to extend the principles behind Google the company into Google the charity...'We want to make the world a better place and so we're embarking on the Google Foundation and we're in the process of setting it up,' Page is reported as saying."


Behind the rise in Google lies the rise in internet credibility

The New York Times (free registration required) offers us another article about Google, this time reflecting on how Google's evolution is tied to our evolving views of the Internet as a legitimate and useful source of information.


Search Beyond Google

An Anonymous Patron writes about an interesting article at Technology Review concerning Google's place in the websearch wars. Competition, their potential IPO, and the future. Read the full article at Technology Review.


Yahoo v Google

At the risk of boring everyone with another Google story, the Times has a really good article that explores all the possible repercussions of Yahoo no longer using Google as the search tool in its directory. While predominately the opinion of Kim Gilmour, a features editor of Internet Magazine, the parts about ways in which Search Engines (particularly Google) are branching out are interesting.


Starting to feel threatened

A Sydney Morning Herald article details some of the changes being made by Google in response to the growing competition from Yahoo and Microsoft. These include adding around 1 billion pages to its index and five major changes to its algorithmic formulas (including a special secret formula).


Journalists' Abuse of Google

misseli writes "In case anyone is still licking their wounds from Joel Achenbach's Washington Post piece on how Google is making libraries (and librarians) obsolete, "Lies, Damned Lies and Google takes journalists to task for ascribing too much relevancy to Google's search results.

From writer Lionel Beehner:
Sad to say, plugging Google in a story has become almost a telltale sign of sloppy reporting, a hack's version of a Rolodex. Journalists, especially ones from highbrow publications like The New Yorker, should be sourcing hard stats, not search-engine evidence, to bolster their stories."


Learn the basics of

Bob Cox writes, The Cincinnati Enquirer has an article, Learn the basics of", on the dangers of using Google and how to use Google more effectively.


Mom, What's a Library?

An article titled "

Search For Tomorrow" in the Washington Post seems to paint a dark future for librarians, while acknowledging how important they "used to be". From the article, "

A generation ago, reference librarians -- flesh-and-blood creatures -- were the most powerful search engines on the planet. But the rise of robotic search engines in the mid-1990s has removed the human mediators between researchers and information."

And more ominously Berkeley professor Peter Lyman states, "There's been a culture war between librarians and computer scientists. Google won." But the article also points out that search engines still have a long way to go. Maybe it's time for librarians to start round two of that culture war...


Google is Harder Than it Looks ETCON talk notes

Cory Doctorow has posted His Notes from the O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference talk, Google is Harder Than it Looks by Nelson Minar from Google.
Not much detail, but it looks like it was an interesting talk, especially "How a search works:"

"Index server, "every page with the word 'apple' in it -- a
cluster that manages "shards" or "partitions" (everything
starting with the letter "a") and then load-balancing
replications for each. Have to calculate intersections for
multiple-term queries"
There's a few other nuggets in there as well.



Subscribe to Google