Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google DVRs and TV Advertising

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the get-googly-eyed dept.

Google 254

Ray writes "Google may be creating their own branded digital television DVR / satellite service. A DVR that lets you "Log In" with your Google Account before you begin your television watching would allow Google to serve up relevant ads based on: the program you are watching, your search history, the type of emails you have received in the past 24 hours (excluding spam hopefully), or anything else Google can track. Imagine the possibilities... You are watching Google Satellite TV through your "internet ready" Google DVR."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

question (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923802)

will it show first posts?

I'm sorry (1, Insightful)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923806)

I think the Google cookie is pretty evil. There's no chance I'm going to let Google track my viewing habits too.

Re:I'm sorry (1)

b100dian (771163) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923874)

Yeah, it's not the same as tracking cookies/browsers. You reinstall, you switch browsers, you clear the cookies, you change provider and lose tail, eventually.

But Television...

Re:I'm sorry (4, Interesting)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923966)

If I can get free sat/cable TV with a DVR and all I have to put up with is a _reasonable_ ammount of targeted ads that I can not skip with the DVR, I'll sign up. I can not afford cable or sat tv seing as I have two kids and a wife in grad school, so I would welcome this.
-nB

You clown (5, Insightful)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924107)

That's how tv started out. That's how radio started out. Eventually, you get offered a "better" serivce (cable, sirius in the above instances) with no ads. Then the ads come back. Rinse, repeat. Eventually google will start charging, and offer ad-free for a fee, but it's more of the same shit.

Re:I'm sorry (4, Interesting)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923878)

Your viewing habits are minor compared to what you search for.
you can leave a tv screen on while you go out and not be actively watching, but google knows every click you already make.

I would rather have no advertising in whatever I watch, but since thats not an option, wouldn't it be tonnes better to have relivent adverts displayed during the programs?

Re:I'm sorry (1)

Odiumjunkie (926074) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924071)

Your viewing habits are minor compared to what you search for. you can leave a tv screen on while you go out and not be actively watching, but google knows every click you already make.

Keeping your searches private is pretty easy; disabling cookies, using proxies, using TOR, using a scraped version of google, etc.

Keeping yourself private from a recording service that requires registration/logging in is a great deal more difficult.

But it's more or less inconsequential anyways seeing as this article is a fantasy and Google won't enter the DVR market anytime soon.

Re:I'm sorry (1)

ajdowntown (91738) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923892)

You know, Google does do a great job at putting out relevant ads when I surf the web, so much so that I don't mind clicking on them to get where I need to go. If they truly made an invasive free way of serving ads, I have no objections to that. My only question is that since this is a DVR, can you then skip the commercials that Google is trying to serve you?

Re:I'm sorry (5, Interesting)

lukewarmfusion (726141) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923904)

I see no reason to complain. Google, Wal-mart, etc. can track my viewing/purchase/search habits all they like. How is this going to be abused? Now I'm a security and privacy nut - but this seems excessive. They'll show ads to me based on my interests? Great! I'd rather see ads for things I'd purchase than crap I don't want. Wal-mart decides to stock shelves with things that are relevant to my area's purchase history - so if I go into a Wal-mart, it's more likely to carry something I intend to buy.

It's smart business - a hell of a lot smarter than blindly throwing ads out there hoping they'll be used. In fact, I'd argue that the Internet is more relevant because businesses can see the value in it. Many of us wouldn't have jobs if there weren't such potential.

Re:I'm sorry (4, Interesting)

dslauson (914147) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924048)

I know that right now I use a DVR service so that I can SKIP commercials. I am not going to pay somebody money and switch services so that they can give me the same functionality, plus serve me advertisements. Seriously!!! Even targeted ads! I refuse to pay to be a captive audience for advertisements, no matter how well they fit my profile.

This would be a smart business model if Google were competing against DVR services that forced random advertisements on their customers, but that's not the case at all.

Re:I'm sorry (2, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924064)

Hey, if you enjoy paying for the communication medium, the content, and then a PVR on top of all of that, so be it. Me? I want a PVR that eliminates advertising completely as that's why I purchased one.

If I didn't have a DirecTivo I wouldn't have my Tivo anymore either. I told them repeatedly that I would drop them like a rock if they started showing me ads on top of the ads I was skipping while I was paying $14/mo to eliminate ads.

YMMV.

Re:I'm sorry (1)

truedfx (802492) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924150)

Wal-mart decides to stock shelves with things that are relevant to my area's purchase history

That's a bad comparison. There's not normally a privacy problem when no info about any person is stored.

Re:I'm sorry (4, Interesting)

Kaa (21510) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924203)

Google, Wal-mart, etc. can track my viewing/purchase/search habits all they like.... Now I'm a security and privacy nut

No, you're not :-)

In any case, the issue is not what kind of ads you'll be shown. The issue is that information is power.

I recommend reading up on the failed confirmation of Robert Bork for the Supreme Court of the United States...

Re:I'm sorry (1)

Robocoastie (777066) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924211)

from article: " People love to watch TV, almost as much as they like to surf the net. Why not make them one?" My take: WRONG. People like to watch TV at the same time they are on the computer. They don't like them combined which is part of the reason WebTV failed. (that coupled with being underpowered and unexpandable) As far as the idea of Google ads. You don't think they'd be able to disable TV ads and only use google ads do you? Ha! No it would still be the every 15 minutes on the dot TV commercials AND Google scrolling ads and all while we PAY for the privelage to RENT the thing due to some stupid EULA they'd most certainly have.

you're not thinking of the big picture (1)

tehwebguy (860335) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924052)

first of all, relevant google television ads would completely blow the industry up. don't you hate normal tv ads? they are awful! something personalized by google, while this may not intially replace normal ads, could cause an entire industry to re-examine their strategies.

but don't think the privacy of your tv is more important than your online privacy, the notion is rediculous. the number of pages or emails you associate with are completely limitless. there are only a few broadcast channels in most areas, usually under 200 cable channels in most areas, and around a thousand (or less, there are more pick-what-you-want plans) satellite channels.

more importantly, don't worry -- google won't expose your dirty browsing / viewing habits. they don't allow "adult" oriented (and a slew of other types of) advertisers or publishers.

Re:you're not thinking of the big picture (0, Offtopic)

xiando (770382) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924195)

I strongly disagree with "but don't think the privacy of your tv is more important than your online privacy" for ONE simple reason.

Most people run Windows on their computers and are thereby at the whim of a company who is still telling you a airplane hit the Pentagon on 11. September 2001 http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77.html [thewebfairy.com] http://www.google.com/search?q=pentagon+flight+77 [google.com] in their so-called Encyclopedia even though it is so much evidence one did not that it should be totally obvious even to a four year old, but with computers, at least you have a choice. There are other choices like Linux available. You can choose to run a Operating System where you have complete access to the source code.

But when it comes to Television, you traditionally have absolutely no control what so ever what the device is doing. You have to blindly put your faith in the hands of the corporation who provided you with the device. With a computer, you can encrypt your e-mail, deny sites to set cookies and so forth. You are control. With a TV-type device, you are generally NOT. That is why I find it far more important to ensure that such devices respect your privacy; You simply have to accept the software in the device where as a computer allows you to completely customize it according to your privacy preferences.

Re:I'm sorry (4, Informative)

xiando (770382) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924105)

Are you afraid that Google will spy on you? Edit - Preferences - Cookies - Allow sites to set cookies - Click "for the orginating web site only", select Keep Cookies: until I close Firefox That being said, there is also a lot of plug-ins like the ones who show "Page Rank" that track you. And the Google spyb.. eh, toolbar. But those are optional additions, just like keeping cookies (or accepting them at all) is a choice IF you have basic computer knowledge.

I can't help but wonder... (4, Interesting)

Mayhem178 (920970) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923807)

...if the broadcast flag will affect this Google digital signal. Seems like kinda poor timing on Google's part with the whole broadcast flag issue still up in the air. Maybe they know something we don't.

Re:I can't help but wonder... (1)

VJ42 (860241) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924085)

The broadcast flag is only really a US issue AFAIK we here in Europe (and the rest of the world) don't have anything like the broadcast flag*, there's still a large market too be had even excluding the USA.

* It's so obscure here I had to remind myself what it was with a quick glance at wikipedia.

Re:I can't help but wonder... (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924189)

Could they get content from channel affliates in England/Canada/Australia or something, where there are no broadcast flags, and then show it over the internet here? I know that due to some legal issues, you have to get transcripts to some tv shows from servers in Europe.

Re:I can't help but wonder... (1)

ajs318 (655362) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924126)

What is this Broadcast Flag of which you speak? Is this something that indicates whether the content being broadcast is "programmes" or "adverts", so that the recorder knows when to insert chapter markers / stop recording? If so, I would love to see something like this. It would make every TV station just like the BBC!

Re:I can't help but wonder... (1)

gregbains (890793) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924208)

You DO NOT want a broadcast flag, it is evil.
A Broacast Flag [wikipedia.org] is a set of status bits (or "flags") sent in the data stream of a digital television program that indicates whether or not it can be recorded... Possible restrictions include ... forceful reduction of quality when recording (such as reducing high-definition video to the resolution of standard TVs), and inability to skip over commercials.

Re:I can't help but wonder... (1)

pulse2600 (625694) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924216)

The broadcast flag would be used for DRM, the flag will determine wether or not the content can be recorded. Devices would have to be able to interpret this flag and respond to the flag appropriately, meaning it will refuse to record a flagged TV show or movie.

Google Media Device (2, Insightful)

ajdowntown (91738) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923811)

Is this the sort of thing where you need like a google media device in between the satellite and your tv? If not, how long before Google decides on putting one of those out?

Re:Google Media Device (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923940)

The Netflix deal with Tivo fell through, IIRC. Perhaps Google will take the reigns and work with Tivo instead. After all, Tivo has developed software to deliver advertising to customers' Tivo units.

Why would I want that? (5, Insightful)

iainl (136759) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923812)

Why would being served even targetted adverts over my recordings be preferable to the current solution of no adverts at all?

This is a solution in search of a problem, surely?

Agreed (5, Interesting)

Dukael_Mikakis (686324) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923981)

I think Google is overreaching at this point. I guess Google's now trying to float off of their cachet to move into other industries.

Parent has a good point in asking why we would want to use Google's DVR when there are ad-free versions already available. Indeed, isn't the *point* of a DVR to get rid of ads? Am I missing something?

On top of that, the example of Tivo indicates that there are evidently some issues with the technology/market as it is (the DRM "forced delete", for example), and I'm not sure if Google's DVR system will resolve any of those, though I wouldn't put it past Google to figure out a way to get it working.

But I'm not sure if I'm buying this "total integration" thing Google's pushing. What are they going to get from my email? I send an email to my friends saying, "Wow, did you catch the latest 'Lost'?" and Google knows to record 'Lost'? I think in the end, some separation of the different aspects of my life is a good thing and I'm not eager to plug my whole life into Google just yet.

Re:Agreed (5, Insightful)

Damek (515688) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924088)

Indeed, isn't the *point* of a DVR to get rid of ads?

No, to most people DVR is about time-shifting shows, not removing ads. Removing ads is a bonus, but most people are going to have DVR straight from their cable company, and the only "ad removal" feature is the VCR-style fast-forward.

DVR is about removing the old problem of "Oh, I'd like to watch that, but it's not on now."

The next step is removing the problem of "Oh, I'd like to watch that, but I didn't record it."

Whether that's pay-per-show or "free" with ads, people aren't going to care much. It's going to depend on the choice of the channel (or content provider).

Oh, and you're going to pay for the intermediary pipe that delivers the content, too.

The future is the same as the present: pay the provider for their cost in producing the content (via ads or direct purchase/subscription), plus pay the distributor for the cost of delivering the content to you. The fundamentals will not change, though the procedures and details involved may shift to the internet.

Re:Why would I want that? (1)

ryanvm (247662) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924015)

Sounds more like a problem in search of a solution.

Re:Why would I want that? (1)

pturpin (801430) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924081)

What if you could have all of those satalite and cable channels w/o the bill? Not sure that is what the idea is, but you are right there has to be some incentive for the customer in order for it to work.

Re:Why would I want that? (3, Insightful)

joshstaiger (213677) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924091)

Sure, it's not something you want currently, but right now your free lunch is due to the fact that a relatively small portion of the public bypasses ads using a dvr.

Who pays for the programming when everyone uses a dvr?

This could be a solution for "free" TV over the long term.

Evil! (1, Funny)

Olix (812847) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923816)

First its the search engine, then the email, then the news... Now TV that brings it all together? They are trying to steal our minds I tell you!

Re:Evil! (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923906)

Watch out for Google-specs and Google-gloves.
They really will know everything you see and do.
Hell, in the current google run, I wouldn't be shocked to see google brand toilet paper.

Just thank god its not microsoft and clippy - "It looks like your wiping your arse...."

DRM (5, Insightful)

Cyberglich (525256) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923826)

The main problem with any profesionaly made DVR these days they have to load the sucker with DRM to keep from getting sued (ala Replay TV). MythTv is slowing getting to the point when a non-linux person will be able to buy a prepackaged hardware set and then load from a bittorrted iso all there software updates and it will be superior.

Re:DRM (1)

frodo from middle ea (602941) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924044)

and then it will be sued

Contextual Relevance vs. Complete Avoidance (5, Funny)

deliciousmonster (712224) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923827)

I would imagine that they would at least be able to serve up something more relevant... but would they allow me commercial skip? Is having a DVR with no commercial skip "evil" or just good business? If they were relevant ads, I might be incluned to watch...

All Victoria's Secret ads... let me go get on their mailing list real quick...

Re:Contextual Relevance vs. Complete Avoidance (1)

deanoaz (843940) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923918)

If it won't skip commercials I'll never have it, I don't see why anyone would. I get sick of commercials in broadcast TV to the point I even stop watching shows I like--right in the middle--and say, 'To hell with this, I'll watch a DVD or something where I can skip the commercials.'

Either I've gotten much less tolerant of commercials, or the quantity and obtrusiveness of the ads has gone up so much that sitting through them is no longer an option after the first few.

Re:Contextual Relevance vs. Complete Avoidance (5, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923949)

All Victoria's Secret ads... let me go get on their mailing list real quick...

You mean there are guys out there that haven't been getting the Victoria's Secret catalog since they were 12 years old? What did you do with all that free time?

Re:Contextual Relevance vs. Complete Avoidance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13924087)

It will allow you to skip the commercials, but it will display commercials while you are skipping the other commercials

My search history (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923828)

I don't know about you but I wanted want "relevant" ads on my television.
Especially not based my searches for adult movies.

Sorry NBC... (3, Funny)

davidwr (791652) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923830)

I guess we won't be needing this [slashdot.org] after all.

This just in... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923831)

Google may be the second coming. It's still a bit early to know for sure and all we really have is rumors and speculation. But, Slashdot seems to feel that Google is the second coming so, it seems only logical that it is a fact.

We'll be repeatedly reporting further on this unsubstantiated rumor for weeks to come. Unless further rumors are revealed.

Unlimited possibilities! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923832)

Imagine watching Dirty Harry through this PVR. Just as "Make my day" line is read an ad for the Smith & Wesson firearm company pops up.

I think I just peed a little. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923838)

Google monitoring my friends to tell me what I should buy.

Yay.. (0)

TarrySingh (916400) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923845)

it's about time!

Satellite? Yeah Right, It'll be Broadband (5, Insightful)

Orasis (23315) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923849)

No way is Google going to spend the capital to do their own satellite system or the licensing fees to use someone elses. They'll be doing it over broadband to a hard drive within the Set Top Box.

If they want this thing to be cost effective for HD, they should use Swarmstreaming [swarmcast.net] .

blogs are news? (5, Funny)

thatshortkid (808634) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923853)

You smell that? Do you smell that?... Speculation, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that. I love the smell of speculation in the morning. You know, one time we had a random Google idea, rumor-blogged for 12 days. When it was over I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' rumored product. The smell, you know that speculation smell, the whole blog. Smelled like... victory.

Re:blogs are news? (1)

segedunum (883035) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923970)

Yer, but it confuses the shit out of Microsoft!

Re:blogs are news? (-1, Offtopic)

I'm Don Giovanni (598558) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924127)

LOLOL
God, I wish I had mod points! This is a classic post. Thanks for the laugh! :-)

At least Tivo lied at first (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923854)

Geez, google really is trying to build the biggest most detailed maps of people possible. No thanks, I like my data private.

Re:At least Tivo lied at first (0)

Anonymous Monkey (795756) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923990)

You like your data so private you post AC...Wow, and I thought I was a paranoid monkey.

"May be" creating? (5, Insightful)

generic-man (33649) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923858)

This article is pure speculation based on a domain name (googledvr.com) that Google doesn't even own! The article says that Google "might buy the domain" from its owner should Google want to start a DVR service. TiVo is becoming marginalized and plans to make its money from advertising technology-sharing agreements with cable companies [google.com] and patent [tivo.com] licensing.

The article even mentions "GBrowser," which as we all know is Google's Master Plan to unseat the most popular web browser in the world, bar none [zdnet.co.uk] .

Google also owns googleporn.com. Can we have an article about how they're about to put every porn site out of business?

Re:"May be" creating? (1)

domspe (903598) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923897)

yes, yes!! Google is creating their own branded porn sites & viagra wholesale website!!! ain't the net grand?

Mod parent up (4, Insightful)

count0 (28810) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923915)

Calling the article pure speculation is generous - it's making an outrageous claim to drive traffic to ZDnet...

Re:"May be" creating? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923950)

There's a googledvda.com joke here somewhere. I guess I just haven't had enough coffee yet.

Re:"May be" creating? (1)

rathehun (818491) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923971)

You know what? They did put quite a few porn sites out of business.

Check this site [google.com] if you don't believe me.

Cheers,R.

Re:"May be" creating? (2, Informative)

Ektanoor (9949) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924013)

Well, I may agree that the article is speculative. It does not hide that. But note that the author states "googledvr.net/.org" and not googledvr.com. Now, while the .com belongs the God knows who, .net and .org are technically related to Google. Take a whois search for that. BTW the registrar is some eMarkMonitor... Doing a search I came into this data:

"eMarkMonitor can not only help you make your mark but it also can aid you in protecting it. The comany provides software used to manage intellectual property on the Internet, including applications for brand management and trademark management, as well as protecting Web site domains and enterprise DNS information. eMarkMonitor also provides fraud protection applications used to detecting, analyze, and combat phishing attacks. The company's customers come from a wide range of fields and typically are attorneys, marketing and brand managers, and channel managers."

Re:"May be" creating? (1)

gihan_ripper (785510) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924104)

That's true, but the original article [nytimes.com] quotes the Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, talking about the possibility of Google serving ads on TV:
"If we can figure out a way to improve the quality of ads on television with ads that have real value for end-users, we should do it."

Re:"May be" creating? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13924130)

googletv.com is owned by google

Imagine the possibilities... (2, Insightful)

goldspider (445116) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923860)

"...would allow Google to serve up relevant ads based on: the program you are watching, your search history, the type of emails you have received in the past 24 hours (excluding spam hopefully), or anything else Google can track. Imagine the possibilities..."

I am, and I'm not terribly thrilled with them.

Is the typical Slashdotter concerned with the sheer volume of information that is being collected about people by a single corporation? I'm afraid I'm not going to shed my skepticism just because Google claims to "do no evil".

Re:Imagine the possibilities... (1)

rincebrain (776480) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924103)

You make a valid point. Honestly, I can see where people are coming from - gathering information is not necessarily evil. But by the same token, I don't like my information being gathered.

Do no evil = Thou doth protest too much (1)

I'm Don Giovanni (598558) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924179)

"I'm afraid I'm not going to shed my skepticism just because Google claims to "do no evil"."

The propensity of an entity to do "evil" is directly proportional to the propensity of said entity to deny that it does evil. ;-)

Oh, boy! Will my wife be pissed! (3, Funny)

Karma_fucker_sucker (898393) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923863)

... with your Google Account before you begin your television watching would allow Google to serve up relevant ads based on: the program you are watching, your search history, the type of emails you have received in the past 24 hours (excluding spam hopefully), or anything else Google can track

I can see it now. Ads for pr0n and naked celebrities will be coming up on the TV!
Also, if I subscribe to the Tin Foil Hat newsletter, will Google start sending me ads for products that will block those ads?

If this were ANYONE other than Google... (-1, Flamebait)

rindeee (530084) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923871)

...Slashdot would be lambasting them. There is a massive potential for misuse in what Google is doing. I'm not saying Google will misuse it, or that anyone WILL misuse it. The potential does have to be considered with a healthy level of skepticism.

Re:If this were ANYONE other than Google... (2, Insightful)

/ASCII (86998) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923969)

Time for a reality check, I think. Googles honeymoon is over, Slashdot is lambasting them.

apoplectic content creators (3, Insightful)

G4from128k (686170) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923872)

I wonder how NBC will feel if their online nightly news broadcast [msn.com] gets wrapped with Google ads (especially if the DVR lets one skip ads in the video)?

I sure some content creators will sign deals with Google, but many content distributors will have a knee-jerk anti-Google reaction because this makes Google a direct competitor (e.g., another company distributing ad-supported content).

Great (3, Insightful)

Kohath (38547) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923879)

If they can give me targetted ads, they can give me targetted TV shows. More shows I like, available when I want to see them. All to get me to watch ads that are for stuff I might actually want to buy. Sounds good.

Google DVR Office (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923891)

Great! Now I can tape all the shows I'm missing when I'm busy typing in Google Word on this fabulous Openoffice.org-based, fully networked Google Office product that's just made my life so much... ... oh, wait.

Oh, great (4, Interesting)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923901)

Imagine the possibilities... You are watching Google Satellite TV through your "internet ready" Google DVR."

Hooray! First the Web, then TV... I can hardly wait until all media are subsumed into the maw of a single corporation. What could possibly go wrong?!?

Re:Oh, great (1)

wilsonjd (597750) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924005)

I can hardly wait until some other media companies learn how to be as smart as google.

Trust (3, Insightful)

segedunum (883035) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923910)

I would never trust Microsoft in a million years to do anything like that, and I don't trust Google either.

Ugh (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13923911)

I'm already sick of google ads.

It comes down to money. (2, Interesting)

Holmwood (899130) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923920)

It costs money and time to create good content. Even brilliant stuff like IMPS took years of volunteer work to produce. In the network age, the question becomes, how do we pay for this content? People will still develop free content for the joy of creativity, but if they can't feed their families, they'll have to do it part time in addition to a day job. Suppose the revenues from google's targetted ads were so good that google could afford to provide the consumer with a free (basic) TV, a free digital media device, and a free basic video stream (with ads) of popular programs. Would there be people who'd gladly go for this? You bet. Would this be a huge benefit for the very poor (as long as they gave and were able to give informed consent and the tracking was no worse -- no more evil -- than the automated tracking of google mail)? I think yes. Would there be people who'd rightly be outraged at the violation of their privacy that this would entail? Yep. They'd obviously not be members of such a service.

Well, of course (4, Interesting)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923929)

No surprises here. Google has been slowly but surely horizontally expanding into other types of directed advertising. Print (magazines). Radio. And soon, video content.

Print media is the only place I see this not fitting in with Google's business plan, unless it's used as just a way to offer its advertisers a complete advertising package.

What I see:

If any content can be delivered via the internet, Google will find a way to place targeted ads alongside that content. Whether Google uses existing content delivery systems (e.g., banner ads), or develops their own (e.g., GoogleDRV), they will continue to horizontally expand in targeted advertising.

Not a bad thing, IMO, since it provides revenues for publishers, who will (hopefully) keep their product free or low-price (well, to the consumer, anyway).

So what areas are still relatively untapped by Google? Internet radio? DRV, for now? How about regular television -- can't targeted advertising be delivered via Cable?

Google will continue to offer new services, innovative or not, that have the potential of increasing both ad-views and responses.

Re:Well, of course (1)

TheLetterPsy (792255) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924007)

Google already owns a television channel - Google Current TV - formerly known as Current TV. It is aimed at 18-34s and I've found it rather interesting. It is kind of a mash of news.google.com and every thirty minutes they report on the currently most-Googled stories. I don't get it on my cable box now, but I believe DirecTV carries it. Google bought it a few months back.

Re:Well, of course (1)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924148)

We'll see if it hits Cable or other providers.

One reason Google may want to stay away from this is that they are more of an advertising agent than anything else. If the provide competing content, what regular network will want to provide advertising space for Google's clients to use?

It would be like ABC reselling ad space to NBC, for NBC to sell to their clients.

Better for Google to just deliver the content produced by the other networks... or to just deliver the advertising to those networks.

I'd buy it (1)

Jozer99 (693146) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923959)

I'd buy it. In the past, google's advertising solutions have been much less invasive than their competitors. If this box was a decent DVR, and recomended cool music to me while I was fast-forwarding through kidde cerial commercials and crappy movie adds, whats the problem with that? On the other hand, google could always TURN evil, in which case it would simply go into the trash. This is pretty moot though, since this doesn't sound at all like something google would do. They don't usually do hardware for the masses (the google search boxes are for enterprise, and more about software anyway).

more commercials? (1)

domspe (903598) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923965)

I was under the impression that DVR's came about to help one avoid advertisements. Everyone I know with a TiVO purchased it for two reasons: 1. to avoid commercials and 2. to record their favorite show while they were doing something better than being a couch potato.

Imagine the possibilities:
1) You receive a new Gmail and it pops up automatically on your TV (if you choose to see new messages of course).
2) A ticker at the top of the screen shows recent news that interests you... or better yet, it shows new items from my Google Reader!
3) A more personalized TV experience which will serve up relevant commercials on commercial breaks based on your interests.


I like the idea of an internet-ready DVR, wider span or programming with suggestions related to my viewing habits, my gmail on my TV, and for the most part everything Google... but, *not* MORE commercials - even if they are more relevant.

Or, am i just asking for too much?

Relevant ads on my DVR? (1)

smalljs (896225) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923972)

I have a DVR so I don't have to watch ads at all. Of course, Tivo is already trying to screw that up. What's next? A Google car that is linked to Google Earth and Google Maps? They can track my destinations and the nearby stores to remind me when they are nearby. "Hungry? There's a McDonalds 2 blocks away!"

Re:Relevant ads on my DVR? (1)

ajdowntown (91738) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924009)

What's next? A Google car that is linked to Google Earth and Google Maps? They can track my destinations and the nearby stores to remind me when they are nearby. "Hungry? There's a McDonalds 2 blocks away!"


Oh man, that would be great!!

Re:Relevant ads on my DVR? (1)

smalljs (896225) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924067)

Yeah, I'd love to have my car automatically start reading off ads to me at random times...

Commercials as we know them are doomed (1)

NerdBuster (831349) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923994)

I believe Google's ability to advertise inconspicuously will dominate the marketplace in the years to come. The days of annoying commercials for minutes at a time are numbered. People won't stand for them as is evident by the popularity of DVRs. I started using a homemade one 3 years ago and haven't looked back. People would say something about a commercial they saw and I honestly can say I haven't seen one in a loooooong time :)

What Google will hopefully bring to the television is what they brough to the web... text ads or something else unobtrusive they people don't mind seeing. They could even be shown during a show in the lower right corner like most stations display their stupid logo.

Obviously, I'm no Einstein otherwise I would be working for Google, but there has to be a successor to the half-century old commercial. It's annoying, expensive, and going the way of the dinosaur.

gasmonso http://www.religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]

Why should it be relevant to the show?! (1)

autophile (640621) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923995)

What, if I'm watching Knight Rider, I want to see Pontiac commercials? Or commercials for David Hasselhoff toys? Right now, commercials on TV are geared towards the things that a typical person watching the show would purchase. That's the only connection to the show. Which is why commercials during cartoons often are for breakfast cereal and toys. Not for, I dunno, bikinis with tails (if you're watching Drawn Together).

I'd think the better way to do this would be for Google to serve up commercials relevant to *me*. Who cares what show I watch?

--Rob

in other news... (0, Offtopic)

revery (456516) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923996)

In other news, Google may be releasing their own branded digital toilet. A toilet that lets you "log in" to your Google account before you do your business would allow Google's complex waste analysis algorithms (codenamed CrapSense) to serve up relevant ads (printed on GTicker toilet paper) based on what you have eaten recently, your hydration level, or anything else Google can track.

Imagine the possibilities.

Will customer support be non-beta? (1)

abelikoff (412709) | more than 8 years ago | (#13923999)

I've recently been invited to Google's Orkut. Unfortunately, the registration process didn't go all that well and I ended up having the Orkut service enabled on my Google account yet being unable to log in.

I've been trying to get help from Google for two months already. So far, I only received two automated responses and nothing else. I am still unable to log onto Orkut.

My overall experience with Google is mixed: it works great when it works. When it doesn't work, it's a disaster - there is no contact phone number or e-mail address where a human being would try to fix the problem. You are basically on your own because, you know, "It's free, so no guarantees."

I hope, Google DVR if it ever gets released without their favorite 'Beta' qualifier, will have real customer support. Google so far has been in business where they provide no guarantee to anyone. They have to learn how to support their clients.

your search history (1)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924004)

Not that I mind Google tracking and directing commercials I might want to see (hey I gotta watch them at some point) but do I really want pr0n commercials popping up when I am chilling with some girl watching tv?

not sure about the DVR, but the advertising part (1)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924040)

I've seen other grumblings (although from blog-type sources so take it for what it's worth) that it seems likely that google would consider trying it's hand at traditional TV advertising brokering using what they learned from Adwords/Adsense.

Madison avenue isn't shaking in it's boots just yet, but could be interesting if they figure out a way to sell advertising traditionally more efficiently AND make money doing it. (or if there's some 3rd option that puts the whole industry on it's ear) *shrug*

Marklar. I mean, Google (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13924046)

Excellent. Soon I can google my google on my google google.

scary. (1)

CDPatten (907182) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924058)

I know the /. crowd worships google, but the fact is they collect more personal identifiable information on people then anyone else. Its not anonymous. And that makes me uneasy, and frankly I view that type of collection evil.

The DVR service is a great idea, and lots of money to be made their. MS has been all over this stuff for years with their media center, iptv stuff, etc. I think Google could do a decent job with a DVR, but I don't trust them anymore then MS, the government, or any other evil/big organization. I don't want them keeping records of me, and certainly not scanning my email and serving up ads based on a message I got that morning.

Think of the possible problems. Let's say someone has cancer and got email discussing it from their wife. They haven't told their children yet, they are sitting watching tv with them at dinner, and there come the cancer drug ads. Nice way to find out that your dad has prostate cancer. I'm sure others can think of better examples (I can think of some funny vaigra and herpies ones), but you can clearly see where I am going with it.

You've GOT to be kidding... (1)

hendridm (302246) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924076)

What's with all the cheesy Google rumors? Why isn't this filed under the "Laugh. It's Funny" category?

I already get ads that disrupt the shows I'm watching with paid cable (and I'm not talking about commercials, I'm talking about those invasive ads in the bottom corner of the screen advertising shows on the channel I'm already watching).

I suppose it's no better than when they plaster a TORNADO WATCH (!!) map over my programs that takes up about 30% of the screen real-estate. They just don't seem to understand the only reason I watch your bloody ads is for the content. Erode my content and I become less eager to watch your stupid, redundant ads.

I guess it helps prevent piracy. No way I'm going to burn a copy of the annoyance-laden series when I can buy or rent the series without said annoyances. Of course, I have to wait much longer for the DVD release :(

While I'm on a rant, why do some commercials show 25 seconds of irrelevant content only to give the punchline in the last 5 seconds of the ad?? I can't count the number of times I've watched ads and said to myself, "ok, neat, so what are you selling?". I blame Nike for starting it all. Thank goodness for Tivo.

well.... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924090)

i personally don't mind commercials per se, though it really bugs me when they show the same commercial two or three times in the same break, particularly if it's an annoying one or if it has nothing to do with me (I'm fairly certain everyone who doesn't live under a rock knows what Viagra is, and I'm also pretty certain i don't need it (yet) so stop pelting me with the ad 3 times each and every commercial break after 8pm.)

if they would keep the commercials varied and tuned to my interests, I'd be fine with it. besides, commercials give me time to head for the john or make a snack when I'm watching a movie or something.

ORB is here today. Bypass Google (1)

rspivack (776557) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924102)

I've just been playing with the ORB free service [orb.com] . It allows you to take your own PC and turn it into a personal streaming server for audio, video, music, and Live TV. Yup -- if you have a TV Tuner card it will allow you to stream live TV anywhere. The website (www.orb.com) acts as a session setup/co-ordinator so firewalls are not a problem. I suspect (although I haven't verified) that all the streaming is actually P2P between your PC and the end station, orb.com is only used to set up the connection. Besides being firewall friendly, the key thing that orb does is transcoding on the fly -- it will adjust the stream to fit the bandwidth requirements of the transmit pipe and the end device. they state that you can stream to a PDA or certain cell phones, not just PC's but I haven't tried that yet. It does not require PVR software in the PC, but will co-exist with Windows MCE or other PVR software too.

Hah! (-1, Offtopic)

RoffleTheWaffle (916980) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924114)

I so called that.

Hasn't anyone watched sci-fi? (1)

andrelix (873009) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924117)

Terminator, etc, google is going to take over the world! Be careful, be VERY careful...

This is pretty huge! (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924120)

Many people love and trust Google in the same way they love and trust Apple. It's well established that they do not love or trust the people they are currently doing TV business with (cable or other satelite TV service).

But is Google prepared to go head-to-head against some of these entertainment giants? Some of these have some seriously strong backing. This will be an interesting and exciting time! (And hacking Google DVRs will be fun!)

Great... (2, Interesting)

Dzimas (547818) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924176)

Strange. Google is assuming that you'll be watching television alone (or at least with like-minded souls). Since my wife is a crystal-loving hemp-wearing nature lover and I'm a technodroid, it'll be interesting to see what sort of targeting goes on as we watch shows together on the Googletube.

F & L (0)

design by michael (924422) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924188)

GREEEEAAAAT. GoogleTV. It's not bad enough that our arses are literally glued to our desks in front of the proverbial digital girlfriend... now we can get fat and lazy in front of the boob tube with smart ads. I can just feel the fat cells curdling in my innards.

Better off contributing to MythTV (1)

tji (74570) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924204)

This sounds like more wild conjecture.. people taking little bits of information and drawing some extreme conclusions. But..

As we've seen in other articles here, Google also likes to contribute to existing open source projects. I think this is one of those cases. MythTV is a large project, with a lot of features. It's quite usable now, but like most projects I'm sure it could benefit from getting some more good developers.

The UI could use some work, XvMC acceleration improvements (or integration of other acceleration devices) would be great, and integrating into some Google WWW services would be very good. MythTV has a WWW scheduling interface, but you need remote access to your machine to use it. Integrating the scheduler into your Google account services would be a big improvement.

Direct Targetted Advertising (1)

thebdj (768618) | more than 8 years ago | (#13924217)

Is actually a good idea. I mean I cannot count the number of times I see commercials for the same things over and over again in which I have no interest. Yes, Google can track your television viewing habits, but who is to say that the Cable company can't already do that with those fancy digital cable boxes many of us already have in our homes or apartments?

At least in this case they would be using the information to actually direct advertising better so that I do not need to see the same commercials over and over again. Actually there is nothing quite as annoying at some of the Comcast commercial. I mean I already have cable with you and you are not selling any services I do not already have, so why do you insist on continuing to sell them with those annoying commercials (and WTF is Comcastic?). Seriously Time-Warner wasn't this bad when I had them for a Cable company in Columbus.

Oh, and since I am a single guy I can do without the feminine care product commercials. Shit if Google wants to direct commercials for products and television programs that I would never see because they don't warrant usual advertising during primetime, then sign me up.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?