+1 on parker, google is past tense
so, from what I have read - I am totally in accord with the concept that google is past tense - as parker seemed to suggest here
same theme, but my reasoning/phrasing - from an old blog-post, is a bit different.
the value of information is based on probability — google can only now support highly probable answers, static search results. The capital of Colorado used to be a relatively more improbable answer than it is now
— Facebook and Twitter are pipes for the improbable.
-
sabine-ritter liked this
-
martina-pfeiffer liked this
-
internetabzocke liked this
-
triciawang liked this
-
thegongshow liked this
-
jollilama liked this
-
gbattle reblogged this from lessin and added:
gbattle sez: I too have an old blog post about this subject in a more generalized sense here. The value of information...
-
j2d2 reblogged this from lessin and added:
I’m not so sure “probability” is the right term. It does not seem to capture the nature of the data well enough, though...
-
christmasgorilla liked this
-
arig liked this
-
princeboucher reblogged this from mikehudack
-
lessin reblogged this from mikehudack and added:
Yes on the beer… late is good tho? 11pm? Probability is the way to go *I think* - beer will decide.
-
lessin liked this
-
mikehudack reblogged this from lessin and added:
OK. Makes sense. Why not use the word “accessibility” instead of “probability”? Just to be cute? Let’s grab a beer...
-
lessin posted this
