Europe Blog

Our views on the Internet and society

The New Gründergeist

Monday, October 13, 2014
Share on Google+ Share on Twitter Share on Facebook
Google
Labels: Google in Europe Blog

9 comments :

  1. Oliver VölOctober 14, 2014 at 7:43 AM

    Dear Eric Schmidt, while Nikola Tesla was a bad business man, his inventions have enjoyed huge success. We all use alternating current every day, his power plant in Niagara falls is still working as well as electric motors designed by him. Mark Twain was joking when he complained about the telephone, in fact he admired Alexander Graham Bell and was one of the first telephone users.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  2. UnknownOctober 14, 2014 at 10:02 AM

    great delivery.
    few of my fav excerpts:
    Google isn’t useful because it’s popular; we’re popular because we’re useful
    It’s the recipe that matters the most, not the ingredients.
    Inventions are always dynamic and the resulting upheavals should make us confident that the future won’t be static

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  3. Dr Terence LewisOctober 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM

    Inspirational to the future and beyond.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  4. UnknownOctober 15, 2014 at 10:28 AM

    Great article Eric, very insightful and honest. I’ve experienced the same problems with search over the past years and this gave me the motivation to start a company that approaches search in a different way.

    The biggest problem with the search industry is that everybody copies the existing model of Google instead of approaching it in an entire new way. Even though the existing model has been doing a perfect job for years, new problems, trends and innovation require new solutions. To solve the problems you’ve mentioned, there needs to be a shift in the approach to search.

    Google is great when you know what you are looking for, but when searching for ‘New York’, I get the best links (according to an algorithm) about the topic, without any categorization or alternatives to individual links. Maybe I just booked a flight and thus a link to Booking.com is not the most relevant for me. I rather want an overview of things I can do in New York when I arrive there, preferably categorized. Things that are fun to do are very subjective and differ for each person, so I would prefer several subjective human overviews of curated listings and pick the results of a person I can identify with the most.

    The social trend of the internet has significantly changed the way we find relevant information online. PageRank was very effective at interpreting websites linking to each other as a recommendation of A to B, rather than individual persons sharing websites through their social channels. Websites mostly used to be a group of people working together without an actual human face and acted more like media companies rather than a distribution channel, responsible for the style and quality of content available on their platform. Identifying which information is most valuable became much more complex. Nowadays, information online is much more personal and individual websites contain lots of different styles and quality of information, because they act more like a distribution channel for individual persons than a big content producer with a consistent style and quality they safeguard. The value of content has to be identified on the level of an individual piece of content and which person created it, rather than on the reputation of the platform/website itself that published the content.

    The social graph of a person is very important these days. People are much more aware of what happens on the internet these days, privacy and trust are a big thing. “Google isn't useful because it's popular; we're popular because we're useful.” - The next big thing in search will be the opposite, it’s useful because it’s popular (and thus social). You don't want the best ranked links on Google, which are influenced by SEM and big budgets, you want the links which are most valued and recommended by your friends, peers and industry experts; an actual human you trust and whose expertise you can validate.

    The ‘filter bubble’ is not the right solution to these problems. This approach creates a false sense of (social) relevancy, because individual links are ranked based on privacy-invading methods and are not ‘social’ at the core. You don’t want a stream of individually relevant links, you want more context, subjective overviews about a topic, each ranked and categorized by an actual human independent on your search history. People most close to you in your social graph should be shown first.

    I believe search needs to become more human, transparent and contextualized to remain effective now and in the future. When I find a bar in New York, I also want to see alternatives, preferably ranked based on different perspectives, but a ‘related:websiteofbar.com’ query on Google doesn’t provide me with any of this. We need a crowdsourced human filter on top of Google to supply what we need in this information-overloaded social web age and get out of the ‘black box’ of filter bubbles and SEM.

    I think the solution could be in the opposite of "Search don't sort" and could be "Sorting your search".

    Klaas Joosten

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  5. Fer FFOctober 15, 2014 at 5:12 PM

    Inpiring.

    My first company also "started" from a dream.

    I had an utopian dream during my childhood and the time i fell in love with advertising.

    When facebook launched...i was dreaming in my bed and all of a sudden i woke up in the middle of the night screaming: "Now i can do it, now is possible!"

    : )

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  6. UnknownOctober 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM

    Eric, very insightful and honest article.

    The biggest problem with the search industry is that everybody copies the existing model of Google instead of approaching it in an entire new way. Even though the existing model has been doing a perfect job for years, new problems, trends and innovation require new solutions. To solve the problems you mentioned, there needs to be a shift in the approach to search.

    Your article inspired me to write a blogpost to reflect on the problems you mentioned. You can read it here: http://zeef.org/2014/10/15/reply-the-new-grundergeist

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  7. PradyOctober 16, 2014 at 5:01 PM

    As to your comment on showing flights under €300 for places where it's hot in December and I can snorkel, I am surprised to hear that Google can't solve for that today.

    It is already sort of done. Please check http://www.emirates.com/us/english/plan_book/inspire-me/inspire-me.aspx. This can be done with the data that ITA has. FYI, I am in the travel tech industry.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  8. winboOctober 27, 2014 at 6:25 PM

    I concur with Eric on the search problem still not been solved. In the year 2000 I started on the solution by creating ".travel" hence, one of the first gTLDs wasn't a success. In 2003 the first "design" prototypes showed up. Finally, in 2009 I created a company called Fairquote, and even many of my friend are from the travel industry and gave me hope, I lost my money and also the hope to ever make this a winner.
    Fairquote "solved" the problem of travel search - most of you will not image how. Despite the ideas being launched now over 10 years ago, it still waits to be discovered. http://fairquote.info
    Dr. Winfried Boeing

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
  9. Addison pfDecember 9, 2014 at 10:10 AM

    Though yahoo search is a favorite topic of discussion amongst monarchs, presidents and dictators, it is impossible to overestimate its impact on modern thought. Inevitably feelings run deep amongst those most reliant on technology, who are yet to grow accustomed to its discombobulating nature. With the primary aim of demonstrating my considerable intellect I will now demonstrate the complexity of the many faceted issue that is yahoo search.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
      Reply
Add comment
Load more...

You are welcome to comment here, but your remarks should be relevant to the conversation. To keep the exchanges focused and engaging, we reserve the right to remove off-topic comments, or self-promoting URLs and vacuous messages

  

Labels


  • Academics 18
  • Advertising 10
  • Africa 26
  • Austria 7
  • Belgium 25
  • Big Tent 11
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina 2
  • Browsers 1
  • Brussels Tech Talk 7
  • Bulgaria 5
  • Campus 2
  • Child Safety 24
  • Cloud computing 17
  • Competition 16
  • Computer Science 35
  • Computing Heritage 37
  • Consumers 11
  • controversial content 2
  • COP21 1
  • copyright 34
  • Crisis Response 2
  • Culture 116
  • Czech Republic 16
  • Data Centre 15
  • Denmark 4
  • Digital News Initiative 6
  • Digital Single Market 1
  • Diversity 7
  • Economic Impact of the Internet 57
  • Economy 24
  • Elections 7
  • Energy + Environment 16
  • Engineering 6
  • Environment 5
  • Estonia 6
  • European Commission 21
  • European Parliament 14
  • European Union 104
  • exhibitions 1
  • Finland 13
  • France 77
  • Free Expression 88
  • Free flow of information 47
  • German 1
  • Germany 65
  • Google for Entrepreneurs 9
  • Google in Europe Blog 846
  • Google Play 1
  • Google TechTalk 2
  • Google Translate 1
  • Google Trends 3
  • Google+ 4
  • Greece 16
  • Growth Engine 3
  • Hackathon 3
  • Hungary 16
  • Innovation 70
  • Internet Governance 7
  • IP 10
  • Ireland 16
  • Israel 17
  • Italy 42
  • Journalism 34
  • Latvia 1
  • Lithuania 1
  • Luxembourg 3
  • Maps 17
  • Middle East 18
  • Netherlands 6
  • News 2
  • News Lab 1
  • North Africa 6
  • Norway 3
  • online 1
  • Online Safety 2
  • Open data 8
  • Open Government 7
  • Open source 2
  • Poland 24
  • Portugal 6
  • Power of Data 25
  • privacy 49
  • Publishing 30
  • Right to be Forgotten 9
  • Rio+20 1
  • Romania 3
  • Russia 18
  • Safer Internet Day 4
  • San Marino 1
  • Science 5
  • Security 7
  • Single Market 7
  • Slovakia 16
  • Slovenia 2
  • SMEs 24
  • Spain 39
  • Startups 6
  • State of the Union 2
  • STEM Education 36
  • Street View 38
  • Surveillance 1
  • Sweden 13
  • Switzerland 11
  • Telecoms 11
  • The Netherlands 4
  • Tourism 1
  • Transparency 12
  • Tunisia 4
  • Turkey 3
  • Ukraine 3
  • United Kingdom 94
  • Vatican 2
  • Youth 2
  • YouTube 42


Archive


  •     2016
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2015
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2014
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
      • Explore the haunted corners of Europe....if you dare
      • Speeding up the Slow Food movement
      • Supporting New Europe’s digital advances
      • Remembering Irish participation in World War I
      • Supporting a new home for Poland’s rich Jewish his...
      • Advisory Council on Right to be Forgotten in Brussels
      • Street View arrives in Luxembourg
      • Teaming up with Oxford University on Artificial In...
      • Launching youtube.com/government 101
      • Promoting social mobility through the Internet
      • Denmark’s "Borgen" goes live on Street View
      • Google Summer of Code 2015 and Google Code-in 2014...
      • The New Gründergeist
      • Sharing spectrum at the ZSL London Zoo
      • Transparency and accountability for the “right to ...
      • Supporting Europe Code Week
      • Join the European Health Parliament
      • Right to be Forgotten Advisory Council in Berlin a...
      • Google Campus is coming to Spain!
      • Street View reaches new heights
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2013
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2012
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2011
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2010
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb
    •     Jan
  •     2009
    •     Dec
    •     Nov
    •     Oct
    •     Sep
    •     Aug
    •     Jul
    •     Jun
    •     May
    •     Apr
    •     Mar
    •     Feb

Feed

Give us feedback in our Product Forums.

Company-wide

  • Official Google Blog
  • Public Policy Blog
  • Student Blog

Products

  • Android Blog
  • Chrome Blog
  • Lat Long Blog

Developers

  • Developers Blog
  • Ads Developer Blog
  • Android Developers Blog
  • Google
  • Privacy
  • Terms