ovulating kleptomaniac? necrophiliac cockatiel?
So I'm watching CNN this morning over breakfast, and they show a story on Google getting subpoenaed. During the course of the segment, they show footage of search results from Google, etc. Below is a shot of one of the screens that they briefly showed....
My only guess is that they reused footage from a segment on googlewhacking...
My only guess is that they reused footage from a segment on googlewhacking...
Tags:
3 Comments:
And to think I never even knew this particular sport existed. I am so out of touch. I only just found out about "extreme ironing" in its mention by an Encyclopedia Britannica representative as an example of such a thing that Wikipedia is more up-to-date on than they are. Now there's Goodlewacking.
I suppose one way to "cheat" at Googlewacking would be to race to index all things which turn up zero hits and then post a single instance on a site that's rapidly indexed, google for it, and log your singlular instance. It'd probably help if you had a psyedonymnous cocatiel to do your posting for you, though, so it couldn't be traced.
How many wacks could a googlewacker hack while the googlewacker ate flap jacks? The world may never know ...
Or, at the going rate, that'll become known as extreme flap jack googlewacking. It will, of course, only be fair if all participants are required to engage in extreme ironying at the same time.
Ugh. I'm going to stop now. I'm over my quota.
I know the real reason why Google is reluctant to release their data:
If we as a society ever *really* find out what we look up on the Internet, the universe would implode.
It's like Douglas Adams writes in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy: the question and the answer can't be known in the same universe.
Ow Josh...you hurt my brain!
Post a Comment
<< Home