Tag Archives: Google

Remember chat rooms? Omegle.com does

Image representing AOL as depicted in CrunchBase
Image via CrunchBase

My friend Blake recently stumbled upon a company called Omegle.com that lets you anonymously chat with strangers.  Another buddy of mine had previously suggested this service in video form, so I thought i would give it a spin.

All in all, the experience (below) reminded me of sneaking up to my room to cruise the AOL chatrooms as a pre-teen.  How exciting it was for a kid living in a town of 8,000 residents to be able to talk to 13 or eve, gasp,  14/fs.  I can still remember when I told my mom that sometimes I prenteded to be 13 or 14 because the older “girls” wouldn’t talk to me- She said not to be dishonest.

In a world of facebook and now google latitude (google’s location based social network), it’s crazy even for people of my generation  (X) to look back and remember living in the pre-cell phone world.

Here’s my Omegle convo:

Omegle.com: Looking for someone you can chat with. Hang on.
You’re now chatting with a random stranger. Say hi!

Stranger: oi

You: howdy

Stranger: oh hai
You: where are you from?
Stranger: brasil
Stranger: how bout u
You: USA
You: new york city
Stranger: awesome
You: where in brasil?
You: i hear great things
Stranger: tahiba
You: is that in the north?
Stranger: no
Stranger: west
You: check
You: this is such an old school idea
Stranger: that will be $40
Stranger: what is
You: reminds me of chat rooms in the late 90s
Stranger: i no isnt it terrible
You: i wonder why we came here?
You: my buddy just sent me the link
Stranger: if u get an answer give it to me
Stranger: i’m looking for answers to dull questions from a large sample of losers
You: well, im researching new technology companies while preparing for a job interviews.
You: which makes me a dull loser im pretty sure.
Stranger: no just a loser
Stranger: my questions are dull
You: actually, im thinking, fck, maybe i dont want to work for someone else anyway.
Stranger: moving my adjectives around
Stranger: lulz
Stranger: y
You: maybe i want to go to fcking spain and start a tour company
You: what’s lulzy?
Stranger: do u believe in god?
You: havent proven that he doesnt exist yet so sure.
Stranger: lulz is a corruption of the acronym lol
Stranger: it means laugh out loud
Stranger: y is an abreviation of why
You: ah checkk
Stranger: y do u say check?
You: im way out of the loop
You: check means “ok. i got it.”
Stranger: unicorns haven’t been proven to not exist
Stranger: same with gnomes, elves, fairies…
Stranger: dragons
Stranger: ur logic is flawed
You: i can’t say with 100% certainty that unicorns don’t exist somewhere.
You: my logic is fine.
You: look how big the universe is.
You: do i think there are unicorns on earth?
You: no
Stranger: yea u r right
Stranger: might be unicorns somewhere else
Stranger: lulz
You: jaja
Stranger: just like god
Stranger: both exist
Stranger: in peoples imagination
You: maybe but im not going to make assertive claims either way
Stranger: 4 what defines reality anyway
Stranger: u did well
Stranger: how many years did it take u to graduate college?
You: it’s whatever we want. i enjoyed sharing this moment with you stranger from brazil. tchau!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Real time search: Not better. Not worse. Different.

Image representing Twitter as depicted in Crun...
Image via CrunchBase

The value of Real time search is the subject of much debate*.  Here are my thoughts:

Real time search is not better than conventional search, but it is different. The most succinct description of the difference i’ve seen was from Sean-O on Alex van Eslas’s Blog

“Google is for things that have happened.
Twitter is for things that are happening.”

From my past two hours of research, this is the most fundamental distinction I’ve seen.  Here is why it exists:

It takes time for Google’s algorithm to index content and additional time for it to recognize that good content is actually good.  During that time, new and potentially more content may come into being but Google wouldn’t be able to tell you about it.

To use my friend Jordan’s example, if you Google search “best digital camera under $200” you will get a camera that has had several popular blog reviews over the course of the past couple of months.  The problem is over weeks that it took for that camera to be released and favorably reviewed by multiple sites, there may already be a better camera on the market.

This is where real time search comes in.  Search “digital camera under 200” on twitter search to see what people are saying about that subject right now. You can get links to blog posts about cameras written hours ago, way before they become popular enough to show up in your Google search results (one of the main ways Google determines the importance of a web page is by how many other pages link to it).

I have a bunch more thoughts on this but they need to be organized.  For next post…  In the meantime, I would love to hear if anyone reading this has ideas for other good applications of real time search.  Thoughts?

*Pundits such as on one side say that “Twitter is a Google-killer” and that we will soon be querying tweetscoop and the like for all of our information needs.   Extremists on On the other side say that Twitter is just a bunch of people talking about what their cat ate for lunch- a completely useless jumble of information.

I have to admit, when I sat down to write this post an hour two hours ago, I thought it was going to be much easier.   I had the intention of shedding some light on why real time search will be valuable by providing specific examples.   Not just for getting the celebrity gossip before Jenny does or learning about the car chase an hour earlier than you would have otherwise, but for practical, “going to male your life better reasons such as …..

Google must include real time search

Readwriteweb: One riot review

Why the real time web isn’t  important

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]