Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Sep 2010 18:53 UTC
Permalink for comment 439989
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-09-02
Funny that Google should introduce this feature now. A year or so ago, the news were full of articles where scientists argued that the carbon footprint of Google searches is too high. This is from the top of the (Google) result list: "performing two Google searches from a desktop computer can generate about the same amount of carbon dioxide as boiling a kettle" (http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article54...).
True or not, Google actually felt compelled to answer/counter these claims (see http://www.google.com/corporate/green/datacenters/), though I'm not sure they succeeded completely.
And now they introduce a feature that (for a two-term search string) replaces one query with 5-10? All so that Thom won't have to press the enter key (though actually he has to move the mouse more because of the query candidates)? I don't think you have to be an extreme environmentalist to see that the pain far exceeds the gain in this case.
As for the feature I actually find it obtrusive and useless, but it's beside the point.