Technology News
|
Google's just announced Google Instant! They say it's going to transform search forever—making it faster, better, stronger. But what is it, exactly?
It's predictive search...
Should you activate Google Instant Search, you'll start seeing search results as soon as you start typing. You'll also be shown a range of possible queries in grey to refine your options, all before you ever hit the "Search" button.
...that saves you time...
Google estimates that Google Instant will save people an average of 2-5 seconds per search. The reason? We read faster than we type, and predictive search pretty much takes typing out of the equation. If every Google user around the world switched to Instant, we'd save 3.5 billion seconds a day, or 11 hours per second.
...(unless you're looking for porn)...
While the normal SafeSearch filters—like those used in Image searches—apply, Google Instant draws the line at "pornography, violence and hate speech." Which means that when you try to autocomplete a generic "porn" search, you're stuck with this:
...that's already here for some users...
There's a good chance you've already got Google Instant up and running, but if not, don't feel too left out; it's going to take a couple of days for the service to hit all Google users. And a bit longer than that to hit mobile—Google says that it's not available in the immediate future for phones, but that it should be coming "soon." In any case, if you don't like it you're not forced to use it; next to every search box will be a link that lets you turn Instant off or on as you please.
...and has at least one neat trick up its sleeve.
When Google Instant is activated, the right arrow key acts as the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button. Glad to see that a healthy sense of adventure has been maintained.
Illustration by Sam Spratt. Check out Sam's portfolio and become a fan of his Facebook Artist's Page.
Send an email to Brian Barrett, the author of this post, at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
.
Gizmodo is the world’s most fun technology website, focused on gadgets and how they make our lives better, worse, and more absurd. Read more at.... |
|
|
Michael Scott points us to a blog post at Mike Cane's blog discussing a question asked in the Google Books help forum asking whether or not a publisher named Kessinger Publishing is taking public domain books scanned by Google, printing them, and then trying to block Google Books from offering the whole thing.
The details are a bit sketchy at this point, but it does seem like Kessinger is taking the public domain books scanned by Google and then offering them for sale. The guy investigating it notes that some of the covers on Kessinger's books clearly show the Google Books-generated cover. Now, it's important to note that Kessinger reprinting public domain books scanned by Google is perfectly legal (perhaps an argument could be made that Google could claim copyright over some aspect of that cover page it generates, but even that seems like a stretch). There's nothing infringing (at least in the US -- elsewhere, it's a bit unsettled) about taking someone else's scan of public domain works and then publishing it yourself.
What's worrying here is the claim that once Kessinger "republishes" these works, that it's somehow getting Google Books to no longer show the full editions of the books. It's not quite as bad as the initial person claims -- that Kessinger is "taking books out of the public domain," as the books do, in fact, remain in the public domain. The real question is why Google is restricting access to these works. If I had to guess, it's probably due to the fact that Google keeps getting hit with (questionable) copyright lawsuits, so they have a "lock-up first, ask questions later" sort of approach to these things. Unfortunately, if that's the case, it lets publishers effectively hide books that should be freely available, at least for the time being.Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
Read more at.... |
|
|
As a kid, I used to go to a lot of amusement parks. I actually spent a couple summers at a camp that basically drove around the east coast from amusement park to amusement park. After a while, you become pretty familiar with the "standard" rides -- and while different amusement parks have different themes, the rides follow a basic theme, and that's actually a good thing. You do see variations on those themes, as different providers differentiate and tweak different designs to make them better and even more enjoyable. But, these days, that's becoming more and more difficult because, you guessed it, amusement park ride-makers are using patents to stop competitors.
Reader Jerry S points us to the story of how Cedar Point, one of the more famous amusement parks around (yeah, I went there too) might run itself into a legal fight because it wants to buy a ride called the Wind Seeker, made by Dutch firm Mondial. The only problem is that competing ride maker Funtime Group, from Australia, makes a ride called the StarFlyer, on which they hold a patent (7666103), and they say that the Wind Seeker infringes. Also, Funtime claims that it'll be suing Cedar Point -- though, oddly, it has no plans to sue Mondial.
Now this is actually a case where Mondial admits, straight up, that it came up with this ride as a response to StarFlyer, saying they were getting requests from customers for a ride like StarFlyer, but which functioned better in more windy conditions (hence the name Wind Seeker, perhaps). And this is exactly how innovation is supposed to work. You have one product that doesn't fully meet the needs of clients, even if it has some nice features, and so competitors come along and tweak it and innovate... and the originator is supposed to come along and innovate on top of that as well. Sitting back and threatening to sue for patent infringement isn't innovation at all.Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
Read more at.... |
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 5 of 445 |
|
