Slashdot Log In
Google Keyhole, Google Scholar
Posted by
michael
on Thu Nov 18, 2004 08:50 AM
from the google-google?-google! dept.
from the google-google?-google! dept.
baegucb_18706 writes "The front page of Google has a link to Keyhole where you can download a free trial of satellite imagery. Is it worth the cost for a subscription, and is it the start of the real commercialism for Google? And a challenge to MS's imagery?" D H NG writes "According to CNET, Google introduced a new service for academics called Google Scholar on Wednesday. This service searches scholarly literature such as technical reports, theses and abstracts. This service will not carry ads." And finally, reader ian@FalsePositives.com links to some speculation about how a sufficiently competent search engine could write the news itself.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Satelite imagery (Score:4, Interesting)
Unless someone can show me otherwise.
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:5, Interesting)
It will be an amazing asset for schools and colleges etc. The 3d exploration module looks really good, and combined with being able to switch to a martian map, it increases it uses further.
I see some of the imagary is scanned at a 3inch resolution (Las vegas for example), but the majority of the planet is at the lesser 70cm-1m range.
3 inches! Just think about how detailed that is, they can see your Tin Foil Beany. They KNOW your wearing it.
I live in England and would love this software, but they don't seem to have the resolution here yet (London is down as a 70cm map, I'm nowhere near there so its useless...
Parent
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:4, Insightful)
Now think about how Google recently grabbed up a small mapquest-like mapping company.
Just thinking aloud here, how much would Google stand to leap over the competition if it were to make software that functions like mapquest, only gives you the ability to fly around, looking at the route?
Parent
then why can't we find obl? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:then why can't we find obl? (Score:3, Informative)
The military have access to much more data than this, and they still run into the same problems, when you see the movies zooming in and watching the henchman lighting a cigarette or blowing up a compound, you are seeing creative expression.
Since Google obviously arent the government, they wont have access to the rawest, newest images.
Infact, most of the sat images used are
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:3, Interesting)
I know surveyors who use terraserver multiple times per day. It is a vital tool for them.
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:5, Insightful)
What I'm asking is "is the everyday joe blow going to be using a tool like this on a daily basis for something other than play?".
Parent
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the more relevant question is, will the average Joe Blow pay a monthly subscription for this just to occasionally play. I bet, and Google is betting, that the answer to that is yes. Look at all the other garbage people spend money on for play.
Also, why is using this "for play" not a valid reason for it to be offered?
Parent
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:3, Insightful)
It is just advertising. Google doesn't intent to keep it on the front page but this is the cheapest way to get exposure for the service. Only a very small percentage of the people out there will need and pay for this but how will google get those people to do so if they don't advertise the fact that they've got this service available?
What's the best way to let people know what ser
Re:Satelite imagery (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
lexis-nexis replacement (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:2)
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:2)
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:2)
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:lexis-nexis replacement (Score:5, Informative)
I also noticed that Google Scholar lists how many times a paper is cited by other works. This seems like an excellent use of PageRank technology.
It is also helpful for academics who need to show that their published papers are being cited. Helps with grant applications and tenure review, I would assume.
Parent
NASA? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:NASA? (Score:3, Informative)
runs on PC, uses
nothing cooler than a USGS 1M in 3D.
Not Such Link (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not Such Link (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Not Such Link (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not Such Link (Score:2, Informative)
Winders (Score:2, Informative)
Authors (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm an author. Why would I want my articles in Google Scholar?
Your work likely has great value to a number of people who may not know it exists. By including your articles in Google Scholar, others will be more likely to find them, learn from them, cite them and build on the foundation you have laid.
Sounds like a good way to make yourself known in the writing world. For now, it sounds like a kickass idea. Go Google.
Not a big deal (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite frankly, Google is a corporation, and if they can help Keyhole get a few more customers (who need the service for whatever reason) while making a few dollars on the side, I think we should accept it as completely legitimate.
And no, I don't think this is the start of a slippery slope of Google into outrageous commercialism.
Re:Not a big deal (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't have the link when I hit the main page, but even so, it's a link. You don't want the service, don't click on it...
It's not a popup, it's not tricking people to click on it... and if it helps google continue providing the service they provide, I'm for it...
Scholar search! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Scholar search! (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Worldwind (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Worldwind (Score:3, Informative)
EPIC (Score:5, Insightful)
Rewriting English is similar to summarizing it. Using clever tricks, computers are about as good at writing a précis of a block of text as a dull 3rd grader -- every such summary lacks nuance, because the computer that generated it lacks understanding. All there is, is tricks. So the idea that an algorithm can be taught not only to understand the meaning of news stories that were written by humans, but then to rewrite them adaptively, is pure science fiction.
My favorite example of this is Cyc [cyc.com], a project to feed into a database all the propositions which some believe constitute "common sense." For example, Cyc knows that dogs and cats are mammals, and that they are common pets, so one could tell it "I have a mammal as a pet," and it could deduce that I have a dog or a cat or maybe something else. In the early 1990s, when the project was getting started, its researchers believed that in about five years, it would be intelligent enough to read plain English text on its own and understand it well enough to assimilate into its database. At that point, of course, it would start absorbing all the knowledge in the world until it became the smartest encyclopedia there was.
And then in the last 1990s, its researchers were again interviewed, and again they said that it would soon be intelligent enough to read plain English text on its own and understand it. When? In about five years. For any time T, strong AI is always about five years away.
So I'm amused that the strong AI postulated in that excellent Flash animation, the key which allows "big media" to die off because computers will do custom rewrites of amateur news dispatches and form newsfeeds of their own, comes to pass in... about five years. I don't think the New York Times has much to worry about.
Price (Score:4, Informative)
Click here [nvidia.com] to get an Nvidia only free(beer) version. Their site seems to be down at the moment, which is odd for such a large company, but when it comes back up, you can get it from there. There are many other cool programs you can get for free if you have an Nvidia card while you are there.
Re:Price (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, you get the software and a trial-subscription.
But you still need a "real" subscription to use it more than 14 days. You can sign up for a free trial-version every 14 days, but that seems like a fair pain in the derriére.
Also if memory serves me Nvidia-users get a slight discount when purchasing a subscription.
Keyholes Maps (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Keyholes Maps (Score:2)
We never liked Alberta anyway...
3 inches (Score:3, Interesting)
Not quite licenes plate reading, but getting there.
I think I'll put a brim on my tin-foil hat.
Keyhole needs throughput capacity (Score:2, Interesting)
If they could have kept my DSL pipe full (or even occasionally full) when pulling down the image data I probably would have sprung for the subscription but the service was just unacceptably slow.
They do recommend that users have a broadband connection, so presumably the throughput will improve someday. However, if yo
Worries about Scholar (Score:5, Interesting)
So it's basically CiteSeer? (Score:5, Interesting)
I am curious which produces better search results. Google seems to produce its results mainly from a handful of sources, but a couple of tests showed it giving more relevant results than CiteSeer, and Google Scholar also immediately returned a copy of this one specific article I was trying to find awhile back that I knew to exist but couldn't find either on CiteSeer or Google normal search... Hmm.
At any rate CiteSeer indexes 716797 articles and Google Scholar... interestingly, doesn't provide an index size number at all.
Re:So it's basically CiteSeer? (Score:3, Informative)
What I believe will be killed here is the commercial scientific indexing system ISI Web of K [isinet.com]
Google is thinking outside the box... (Score:3, Interesting)
This shows some initiative and creativity in trying to develop new ways for people to find all kinds of information, both on your desktop and on the Internet... just imagine when they get all this stuff integrated... you could search for a friend's address, and not only get a map of their house, but a satellite-guided view of the trip, as well as links to their website, public photo collection, slashdot and blog posts, e-mails you've written them, and scholarly articles they've written. Google wants to be a total information provider, and they're the only ones truly pulling all of this stuff together.
Re:Google is thinking outside the box... (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, in the case of Google Scholar, it's a late entry into the market. It also threatens to derail some significant public and free efforts at making scholarly information available on the web. Altogether, I'm not convinced that Google Scholar is something to be welcomed.
Parent
most online scientific journals not free (Score:4, Informative)
I find this a bit ironic. Science is an epistomological enterprise of creating knowledge by the open publication of results. However, the greedy for-profit academic publishers and professional societies know this wall. They have the academic community by the b*lls with their high subscription and publication page charges.
Even the index services like Scientific Citations, GeoRef, Lexus-Nexus, etc. charge high fees. Hopefully Google Scholar will do an end-run around these and provide a more accessable search service.
Don't tar all journals with the same brush (Score:3, Informative)
---Unlike most online newspapers and magazines, almost all the scientific journals I know of require a paid subscription to access.---
Actually, many journals these days allow open access for all articles after a certain amount of time, 12 months in some cases, 6 months in others.
---The exception are the couple of new bioscience journals in the Public Library of Science and the physics pre-print server (not peer-reviewed). But even that the author must pay $1500 for the cost of review and webif
Re:In google we trust (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:In google we trust (Score:3, Insightful)
Our local Chapters bookstore (an extremely large bookstore, with Starbucks, music, gifts, etc.) popped up, filled with wonderful chairs and beautiful features. After they destroyed the rest of the market, had their captive audience, the quality of service declined - the comfy chairs dissapeared because goodness, it cost far too much money to have people in there simply enjoying themselves and not
Re:Please don't kill citeseer. (Score:2)
Re:Writing the nes itself? (Score:4, Funny)
you want it? You already have it
Mission statement Generator [dilbert.com]
(in a life imitating art moment, I am currently looking at a job application that wants me "To exploit all synergies within the group and drive through efficiencies via excellent operational planning.")
Parent
No, images are from AirPhotoUSA (Score:3, Informative)
The Government (actually the USGS) provides the aerial photography for places like http://terraserver.microsoft.com/ [microsoft.com]