Well it looks like Yahoo and Microsoft has got together to take on Google.
http://choicevalueinnovation.com/thedeal/pressroom/Default.aspx
As I understand it, its a 10 year deal where Yahoo will use Bing for its search engine and Yahoo will get 88% for the advertising.
With Microsoft track record I wonder if its a smart move by Yahoo?
Google is the best and will stay that way.
Go use Hotmail and tell me they don't data mine just like Google...
I do use Hotmail and I see no evidence of data mining purely to target me with ads, generated either from key words I use or those of the sender. Now I'm not saying that MS/Hotmail don't data mine, what I am saying, however, is that Google is intrusive and uses the data to get in the faces of people who neither solicited or wanted the ads to begin with. On the other hand, MS uses the opt in approach and generally one has to sign up/register for MS/partner ads, products and services. MS also provides an opt out... Google does not.
Yeah, riiight.
I can't believe this is even in question. Here folks, have some five year old news courtesy of Google (of course):
Then Google up some info on aQuantive, Razorfish, Massive, or any of the other advertising companies MS owns to discover what you can - not about whether MS trades in your information, but how often and through how many channels.
P.S. For extra credit, read through the Privacy Statements and EULAs for the MS web services you're interested in (i.e., MSN, Hotmail, Live).
P.P.S. It's okay to say that you see no evidence of data mining through those services. It isn't like MS is advertising (chuckle) that they're selling off your data. But it definitely is not okay to use that ignorance (or, if you wish a kinder term.. 'blind eye') as a basis to support the otherwise unsupported conjecture that they do not trade in your personal data.
How convenient... that you leave out the bit where I said "evidence of data mining purely to target me with ads". OK, misinterpret, misconstrue... bastardise my intent, but it does not detract from the fact that Google is an intrusive internet scumbag, which is the crux of my argument, not what MS does or does not do.
Again, this takes out of context what I really said.....
However, the point being made was not so much to comment on MS, but to highlight the difference to Google's invasive practices, that MS offers the option to opt out of its advertising materials... whereas Google does not, and that was/is the point being made. I have been using MS products and services for the last 7 -8 years, and I have yet to receive unsolicited emails/spam from MS and/or its partners.
The only materials I receive from MS and/or its partners (Corel, Adobe, Nero, etc) is because I registered products/services and subscribed to their newsletters, and therein lies the difference... Google (if you let them) bombards you with unwanted/unsolicited advertising spam and does not take NO for an answer... there is no unsubscribe function to opt out, and one should not be forced into installing ad-blocking/script-blocking software to not be annoyed by Google spam.
Also, I have not turned a blind eye, nor am I ignorant. MS may very well pass information to its partners for marketing, developmental purposes, but as I said before, I have yet to be pestered by unsolicited MS/partner spam/promos/advertising.... meaning that MS and or its partners are NOT as instrusive as the bastards over at Google, which did target me until I stopped using its products, services and blocked its site with AdBlock, etc.
Put bluntly, I have some tolerance for MS data mining practices... for Google's I have NONE.
There, you have it.
Now, pick a slot on your financial statements and crank up the volume; deafening sounds of the most annoying can still invade your enlightened perspective on what's best or worst.
The more you watch (connect, open your eyes, listen, observe, react, etc) pubs, the less "objectively right" your choices can be.
I'm stuck with brands instead of quality per value; priced to cover floods of jokes rather than facts.
On sale, this week. First come, first serve(d).
Data is precious when abused.
You crack me up Starkers. Your logic is flawed.
Who does, or does not datamine is not much of an issue...as either way you can choose NOT to use their 'product' or 'vehicle' for datamining.
Choice is yours.
Where the shit hits the fan is with the ethics of modifying truth via slanting or blatant censoring of information given by such a product.
Google has a proven track record of communicating a false reality...and has done so for the sole purpose of profiteering commercialism.
I'm not aware of any other 'search provider' [information on-seller] who has market-oriented censorship..... but theirs is NO BETTER than the Japanese Education System omitting references to their torture of POWs in WW2, repainting themselves as 'squeaky clean'....yet quaintly my Uncle could tell a slightly different story, having survived Changi.
Orwell's 1984 and his 'Ministery of Information' [or was that Brave New World by Huxley ....I always get those confused...read them 40 years ago] is alive and well....and living comfortably in the 2000's.
But don't panic.... what you don't know [by deliberate omission] won't hurt you.
This isn't 'conspiracy theorem' this is what the world is like TODAY. As soon as Information is being fucked-with....in this 'Information Age', for whatever the reason....it's a slippery slope to totalitarianism.
Google is NOT God's gift to anyone or anything. As with any/all search providers...they have a commercial model.....but it's all about how they serve that master....and at what cost.
I'm so pleased that I amuse you, kona, that has made my day.
However, my logic regarding Google is no more flawed than anyone else's... unless of course they think the sun shines out of Google's proverbial arse. Thing is, I opened my eyes and am not blinded by the Google hype and: "Look at all the free services we are providing" If Google were purely a search engine provider who had a few free apps on the side, well I'd be a little less hostile towards it... but it's not... purely a provider of free services.
With everything Google does there are agendas and commecial strings attached, seeking purely to profit from your data/usage... and none of it is free. Google charges its clients huge sums of money for on-line advertising... and those costs are passed on to the consumer.
Furthermore, as Jafo alludes to, Google "uses market oriented censorship" and floods the internet with information of its own choosing... meaning that products of non-Google clients get buried and consumer choice is thus restricted to what they want us to buy/know. Now think, if you will, what this does to market competition and pricing... how a 'Google' oriented world helps create a monopolistic marketplace because it keeps popping up the same retailers/providers, while neglecting other reputable dealers who offer the same or similar products with great service at a competitive price. This is how/why many smaller operators go to the wall.. and why the larger, monopolistic ones think they can charge consumers whatever the fuck they like.
What really gets me is how many people think that Google is "God's Gift" and believe it is the best search engine in the World, when clearly it is not... because if it were, Google would not restrict search results to what it wants you to see/buy, but provide all-inclusive results to offer consumers greater choice. No, what Google does instead is repeat several provider entries dozens of times over several pages, as if to say: "Oh looky, see what we have done for you. Nope, that does not a good search provider make... and let's not confuse paid ads with search results... two different animals.
Google has the technology and resources, the all feeling all knowing tentacles to provide all-inclusive search results, but it chooses not to display them, and this serves to create an uncompetitive, captive market that's designed to serve compliant slaves to monopolistic practices, which is why I get out into the stores and research when I want/need to buy goods. I refuse to be led around by the nose and be indoctinated like that, by Google or anyone else... and no, yahoo search is no better when it comes to consumer choice.
Not only that, Google/Yahoo/online shopping makes people lazy.. and how may people have swallowed the online blurb about a certain product only to find it's not what they want/all it was cracked up to be once it's delivered. Nah, get out into the stores and research/check it out yourself... it's amazing how many choices/alternatives there are in the 'real world'
@ Jafo #59. Yeah, everything you said.
Google does a better job at searching than any other engine I've used.
Better? How??? Better at excluding results that may be of interest to you! Better at documenting your search history so as to aim... NOT aim certain products at you! Better at conditioning (brainwashing through repetitive advertising) to get you to buy the products they want you to buy. Better at censorship/lying by omission
Oh well, if that works for you... but for me, well I'm glad I pulled my head out of the sand before my brain got too adled.
I use adblock plus so i see no ads my friend. and I've always been happy with the search results.
You sound a bit paranoid...
If you get anything from this topic, it should be a sense of paranoia.
And my prior response to Starkers wasn't intended to prove Google was better than Microsoft as far as data collection - but to reject a prior (in this topic) statement that could mislead readers that MS was somehow 'better' wrt to targeted adverts based on MS' data collection on its web service customers. I'm strongly in the camp that says MS' web services and data collection policies are not user-friendly. I feel the same about Google, though in practice I've had an easier time blocking their personal data mining than I have had with Microsoft's services (e.g., MSN, Hotmail, Live).
Nope, not paranoid... just a ratbag shit stirrer who loves nothing better than dissing Google.
It's true that I neither like or trust Google, but my tirades against it do not mean that I like or trust Yahoo, Microsoft or any other data mining entity/group/company. I mean, why would you trust anybody who thinks it's their business to know your business? Trouble is, too many product and services providers adopt this snoop/pry policy as a matter of course, thus forcing users, home and business alike to go go extaordinarly lengths to protect/safguard their privacy/data.
That's precisely my point... you shouldn't have to/be forced to take these precautions to protect yourself... not from 'so-called' trusted companies. I mean, it's one thing having to protect yourself from the scumbags who create viruses and malware, etc, you know they're out there devising ways to screw your rig, but it's another thing when you are forced to take steps to protect yourself from what are 'supposedly' reputable companies.
Thing is, kona, the fact that you even have AdBlock Plus installed would suggest that you yourself have some paranioa and distrust going on there... and not just for the malware distributors.
I don't use adblock to protect myself. I use it to block annying banner ads. Nothing paranoid about that. Adblock is not a program that one uses to protect one's self. It's just used to block ads from being seen but they are still there.
I think you need to read up on adblock.
Well it's unlikely the fingerprint will recover the missing child, unless it's a runaway who was caught stealing food. Some parents just want every measure possible to recover them if lost and even go as far as placing tracking devices in watches or clothes. I estimate the fingerprinting is more likely for identifying the corpses of missing children.
Good point...ever heard of a bingplex? Bing sounds more like gaudy jewelry.
Could be the reason for the name. To give it that young/new/fresh/sparkly feel.
All I can think of is cheap and over done.
Same thing, isn't it? You know, protection against brainwashing and subliminal messages... protection against accidentally clicking on an ad and ending up with spyware, browser hijackers and other nefarious scripts that hypnotise and say: "BUY, BUY, BUUUYYYY???
Yup, I'd say there wos something paranoid about that.
Don't need to... use it to block distracting piccies when I go to the Playboy site... I go there to read the articles, you know.
Um, you sure you're using it right?
I'm done argueing with you Starkers. It seems you just don't get it and never will.
Hello, Pot....this is Kettle.....
Google, for me, provides a simple, clean website that I can type in what I want and shows me the way. All of the surrounding crap, such as Google's busines ethics, means little to me because as a regular internet user I'm more than immune to online advertising and while I understand Google makes a lot of money based on their website traffic I myself don't pay them anything. Bing, from what I've experienced, operates a little different to Google. Could I become use to Bing? Sure, just like I got used to Google, and Alta Vista before that, and Yahoo before that. I'll go with whatever works best and will continue to do so. If Bing ever provided a better search than Google, than I'd use Bing. Who operates and owns these engines means nothing to me; the engines ability to find what I want means everything. For me, it's as simple as that.
So it doesn't matter to you how the search results may just be filtered/adjusted to suit an undisclosed agenda?
Say you're a Chinese student of Sociology in China....researching civil disobedience and anti-political dissent in your country....and you search with Google....and get bugger-all hits.
Gosh....conclusion is....the Chinese Administration is a bunch of nice guys that everyone loves....
Groovy...
Thing is kona, I DO get it... Google is a parasite that feeds off the information of others, then on-sells it for profit.
Also, what Jafo Said............
Only lets take it a step further! What about the traders who are non-Google clients... how many search results do you get for them.. the traders who could offer alternatives/choices, possibly better pricing/after sales sevice?? It's not that they can't show them, but rather that they choose not to... and if they are providing a search engine as a public service, to assist members of the public find what they want at competitive prices, then they fail miserably.
Put bluntly, Google is NOT interested in you or I, Joe Blow or the general public... just its paying clients and advertising revenue.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
