Comments on: Google and the end of everything http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/29/google-and-the-end-of-everything/ ... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web Tue, 04 Oct 2011 13:01:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Shannon T Alston http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/29/google-and-the-end-of-everything/comment-page-1/#comment-345500 Shannon T Alston Tue, 03 Feb 2009 01:19:20 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/?p=2528#comment-345500 nice article! nice site. you're in my rss feed now ;-)<br>keep it up nice article! nice site. you're in my rss feed now ;-)
keep it up

]]> By: JoeDuck http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/29/google-and-the-end-of-everything/comment-page-1/#comment-339858 JoeDuck Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:33:23 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/?p=2528#comment-339858 A great big think item Matt, and unless he qualifies his idea more I'm with you on this one. <br><br>However it seemed to me he's making a more reasonable and subtle point than a wrong suggestion that correlation=causation. <br><br>Generally science bases descriptions of behavior or biology or other phenomena on data *samples*. As the sample size approaches 100% our models become closer to the full reality rather than just a model of that reality. I don't agree that we are anywhere near the point of having enough data to do much more than target ads a little better, but in the areas where we have huge data sets I think we will start to find that Google analysis may be able to predict and describe things better than any previous models. <br><br>Far more significant will be conscious computing, which is likely to change the game for everything and everybody almost as soon as that Genie's out of the bottle - probably in about 15 years. A great big think item Matt, and unless he qualifies his idea more I'm with you on this one.

However it seemed to me he's making a more reasonable and subtle point than a wrong suggestion that correlation=causation.

Generally science bases descriptions of behavior or biology or other phenomena on data *samples*. As the sample size approaches 100% our models become closer to the full reality rather than just a model of that reality. I don't agree that we are anywhere near the point of having enough data to do much more than target ads a little better, but in the areas where we have huge data sets I think we will start to find that Google analysis may be able to predict and describe things better than any previous models.

Far more significant will be conscious computing, which is likely to change the game for everything and everybody almost as soon as that Genie's out of the bottle – probably in about 15 years.

]]> By: Infreemation » Blog Archive » Search gets smarter, we get stupider http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/29/google-and-the-end-of-everything/comment-page-1/#comment-338556 Infreemation » Blog Archive » Search gets smarter, we get stupider Tue, 01 Jul 2008 00:22:38 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/?p=2528#comment-338556 [...] pose and falsify or support hypothesies. Mathew Ingram takes issue with the Wired article in Google and the end of everything and Alistair Croll piles on in Does Big Search change science? emphasizing the familiar scientific [...] [...] pose and falsify or support hypothesies. Mathew Ingram takes issue with the Wired article in Google and the end of everything and Alistair Croll piles on in Does Big Search change science? emphasizing the familiar scientific [...]

]]> By: mathewi http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/29/google-and-the-end-of-everything/comment-page-1/#comment-339857 mathewi Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:39:07 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/?p=2528#comment-339857 Thanks, Alistair -- good post. Thanks, Alistair — good post.

]]> By: Alistair Croll http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/29/google-and-the-end-of-everything/comment-page-1/#comment-339856 Alistair Croll Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:09:26 +0000 http://www.mathewingram.com/work/?p=2528#comment-339856 Matthew -- I think you have a point. Even if the technology finds every correlation, we still need science to prove causality.<br><br>I started to write an increasingly long comment here after reading this, then went and stuck it at <a href="http://www.bitcurrent.com/does-big-search-change-science/">http://www.bitcurrent.com/does-big-search-chang...</a> instead. <br><br>Besides, this way I got to post a Google LOLcat ad.<br><br>Thanks for getting me thinking! Matthew — I think you have a point. Even if the technology finds every correlation, we still need science to prove causality.

I started to write an increasingly long comment here after reading this, then went and stuck it at http://www.bitcurrent.com/does-big-search-chang… instead.

Besides, this way I got to post a Google LOLcat ad.

Thanks for getting me thinking!

]]>