Comments on: Google riches outed on the Web

Rarely invoked SEC rule reveals stock option haves and have-nots among rank and file, dividing clubby campus.
Photos: A Google of ways to work

[katamari]

Yahoo all over again.

Hopefully many of you "old-timers" remember when Yahoo went IPO, and just how high their stock went (over US$250/share).

This sort-of thing puts Google in the negative spotlight, although I'm sure they'll find some way to weasel out of it. Rather than our government investigating Microsoft, it should be focusing more on companies like Google -- companies that still seem to suffer from the elitist DOT-COM mentality where initial employees are somehow worth millions of dollars compared to newer ones who work just as hard.

Google's hiring practises have also been under the spotlight numerous times in the past. I myself applied there back in 2001, went through the interview process, and was offered a salary which most people in the Bay Area cannot reasonably live on (around US$40K/year) -- "but you get TONS of stock!" said HR. When I asked Google's HR folk if they knew of any apartment complexes in the Bay which accepted stock as a form of rent payment, they looked at me as if I was from Mars.

What happened to moral, decent, and non-shady American businesses? Where did we go wrong? Or is Google just another example of capitalism gone extreme?

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Sounds like sour eggs...

.

[Al Johnsons]

negative spotlight

http://www.analogstereo.com/eagle_owners_manual.htm

[207495111267145837975635436522]

We can now do something about Google/Yahoo screwing us.

Problem with Google & Yahoo is that they are owned by the same gang.
That is right, they may seem like competing companies, separate companies.
But in fact the same silicon valley (wall street) gang owns both of them.
That is Stanford Univ, KlinerPerkins, Sequoia capital, etc.
What this results in is that they offer no real choice, they offer a monopoly.
And monopolies are always bad for people: search users, Advertisers, and
prospective/current employees, etc.


So I thank god every day that we have a real alternative search engine now,
which is AnooX (www.anoox.com)

Why is AnooX better than mega Wall Street backed corporate giants Google & Yahoo:

1- AnooX search results are Optimized by majority Vote of the people, that is us, rather
than some silicon valley insider schemes, which are Google & Yahoo methods.

2- AnooX shares its Ad revenues with its search users, that is us again.

3- AnooX Ad rates are like 90% less than Google & Yahoo, because AnooX is essentially
a not for profit company.

Mind you AnooX does not have the luxury of Google & Yahoo of being armed with
Billions of dollars, so it currently runs on few servers and thus its search results are
a wee bit slow and it Indexes home pages of web site, so it is good for finding
businesses. But with our support, it will become one of the top Search engines,
for our benefit. After all AnooX is a people driven search engine, for the benefit of
the people, unlike Google & Yahoo which are for the benefit of silicon valley (wall streets)
insiders.

[stephenpace]

Uh, No...

I just tried you so-called 'search engine', AnooX, and I have to say it returned the worst results I have ever seen for an engine. What you fail to say here is that most voters have a self interest. While Google applies the PageRank algorithm (not perfect, but very effective), your site applies people (which you hope will give honest results above and beyond the failed algorithms you apply initially). Sadly, the people that appear to be voting to 'improve' results on your engine appear to be spammers. Or idiots. Or both.

The backers of Google and Yahoo! should be proud they've delivered services that are usable. If they benefit financially from this, great--that's capitalism. From the looks of the results returned by AnooX, their founders should be run out of town on a rail.

[geo11101]

Eric Schmidt is the biggest Mafia puppet in the US. He is bad news for apple users. http://endmafia.com