Making all the difference in the world

Google is setting up their base in Kenya (read the full story here ). Now that's what is called making the real difference in the world. Really! They have money and so do others, but Google, so early in its life-span, is trying to change the world for better in its own innovative way.

One of my colleagues, a couple of years earlier had told me about this display in the Google reception office which had a 3-D globe on the screen and the small points of light that were blinking at various places. These light-points illuminated the places around the world where people were using Google search at that instant. I remember he told me what he was told about Africa looking at the display, it was indeed the dark continent with very little light emanating from it. When I saw this display myself, it was so surreal. With Internet penetration hardly anything, this was but natural to observe.

But the interesting part is not just observing and pondering but taking action. Setting up of a Kenyan office is indeed a concrete step toward making technology accessible to all, irrespective of geography, infrastructure, policy and various other kinds of issues. It strengthens my belief that technology (and especially Internet) is (and has the potential of) bridging numerous barriers that was not possible earlier.

ITs Google all the way!!

I had a chance to attend a computer science technical conference recently. Although topic of the conference was data mining and it is not my research area but I thought I will get good exposure to the way the conferences work in US, so I chose to attend. My main goal was to attend the keynote talks which I thought are very high-level and easy to absorb for an outsider. I was indeed correct at the end of the conference and I liked almost all the keynote addresses. I will not venture here into technicalities of the topics of various talks, but I want to share some observations I made, specially about the talk given by one of the Google's researchers.

The topic of this talk was "Next generation Algorithmic challenges in Google". This was an interesting talk, not that I got all the stuff that was said but overall it was interesting and not completely OHT. Cutting short the context and coming to the portion of the talk, I really wanted to talk about, starts at the beginning of Q n A session. Some of the questions being related to machine learning were really out of my grasp in their entirety, the questions not related to the talk (but which were asked) is the topic of interest in this post.

These questions were related to the Google's mission statement (which centers around providing universal access to information) that was read out by the speaker during the beginning of the talk. Someone questioned something to the effect of - will you make information in my wallet universally accessible. To this, speaker replied that they provide tools and the rest is upto the user. Attached was another question, which inevitably pointed towards Google's policies in China, though it was asked in a very indirect way. To this speaker replied, china is a big country and some presence is better than none at all. (Of course, what is the point of asking such a question, after all Google is a business and they have to make profits to stay alive and it was their business decision. The kind of work they are doing might have different political implications in different countries governed by the local laws and you have to abide by them.)

Anyhow, now picture this: a person from a research lab comes to a technical conference to talk about algorithmic challenges and is asked questions about Google's policies. My question is, first of all, does asking such questions make sense? specially when speaker just talked about algorithms for the last one hour. Its really not a press conference where a company spokesperson is briefing about company policies etc., in which case these questions might make perfect sense. This happened not only at this talk but various other Google talks in the past that I attended. It surprises me why people bring the same topic again and again even though the talk was about core computer science. A better way to put such questions might relate to addressing privacy/security/copyright concerns when making the information universally accessible but then again they have to somewhat relate to speaker's talk and not just appear out of the blue.

Nonetheless, I do not know why but after coming out of Google's talks, I always get a feeling that everyone wants to get in there (and of course why not). I might be generalizing a lot but the kind of questions asked by people (who might be from other companies :)) makes me feel that. Good for Google though.