Kasracer writes "At the Association of National Advertisers annual conference, Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt suggested that it would take 300 years for them to index all of the world's information. From the article: 'We did a math exercise and the answer was 300 years,' Schmidt said in response to an audience question asking for a projection of how long the company's mission will take. 'The answer is it's going to be a very long time.'"Ads_xl=0;Ads_yl=0;Ads_xp='';Ads_yp='';Ads_xp1='';Ads_yp1='';Ads_par='';Ads_cnturl='';Ads_prf='page=article';Ads_channels='RON_P6_IMU';Ads_wrd='google,mainpage';Ads_kid=0;Ads_bid=0;Ads_sec=0; 300 Years to Index the World's Information Log in/Create an Account | Top | 202 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion Display Options Threshold: -1: 202 comments 0: 196 comments 1: 161 comments 2: 84 comments 3: 31 comments 4: 19 comments 5: 16 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way. Longer than expected (Score:5, Funny) by powerpuffgirls (758362) on Sunday October 09, @05:28PM (#13752488) (http://diynews.interneh.com/) I always thought 42 years ought to be enough. [ Reply to ThisCarnac the Magnificent by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:37PMRe:Longer than expected by Celsius 233 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:20PMRe:Longer than expected by the real darkskye (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:56PMWhy it will take 300 years by commodoresloat (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:43PMRe:Why it will take 300 years by bumptehjambox (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:38PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Longer than expected by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:50PMRe:Longer than expected by daveed (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @10:55PMRe:Longer than expected by Almost-Retired (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @11:04PMThe major question is by the-amazing-blob (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:29PMRe:The major question is by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:34PMRe:The major question is by jupiter909 (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:13PMRe:The major question is by michaeltoe (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:58PMRe:The major question is by NickFitz (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:43PMRe:The major question is by Kevin Mitnick (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:37PM10,000,000 years by masterzora (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:30PMRe:10,000,000 years by DyslexicLegume (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:34PMRe:10,000,000 years by masterzora (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:37PMRe:10,000,000 years by eonlabs (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:25PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:10,000,000 years by Hogwash McFly (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @06:25PMRe:10,000,000 years by Billly Gates (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:25PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:10,000,000 years by masterzora (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:32PMWhat the question really was by hackwrench (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:57PM New hardware needed (Score:5, Funny) by nizo (81281) * on Sunday October 09, @05:33PM (#13752521) (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday October 01, @09:52AM) The hardest part will be developing the hardware that is able to recursively index the Google data itself an infinite number of times. [ Reply to ThisRe:New hardware needed by kihjin (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:59PMRe:New hardware needed by spuzzzzzzz (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @07:11PMDespite Slashdot panning it... by hackwrench (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:34PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.How to backup email by igny (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:53PMThere are a lot of areas where essentially this... by hackwrench (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:06PMWhat About... by Adrilla (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @05:33PMRe:What About... by antdude (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:39PM Re:What About... (Score:5, Interesting) by htrp (894193) on Sunday October 09, @05:41PM (#13752582) I would assume that it would be to index the collective sum of information, even as it is growing. It's probably a lot quicker to index something than it is to generate it. With probable future advances in computing power and the development of new algorithms, it should be entirely possible that the speed of indexing (which already probably surpasses the speed of information production) would catch up to all the data that still hasn't been indexed.Think of it in terms of taking a ratio comparison of two infinite series. [ Reply to This | ParentBesides... by Belial6 (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:21PMRe:What About... by barum87 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:05PMRe:What About... by Max Nugget (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:19PMRe:What About... by danhirsch (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:56PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.But... by Bobzibub (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:34PMNot the Moore model but the Bono model by tepples (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @05:52PMRe:But... by adam.conf (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:56PMRe:But... by BewireNomali (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @08:58PM 300 years? (Score:5, Funny) by RonnyJ (651856) on Sunday October 09, @05:35PM (#13752539) 300 years? I'd have thought their other [theonion.com] plan would have been a lot quicker. [ Reply to ThisRe:300 years? by raoul666 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:51PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. I'd like my house indexed (Score:5, Funny) by obli (650741) on Sunday October 09, @05:36PM (#13752548) (http://obli.net/) How long until Google decides that your house is information?Just imagine an army of small robot spiders invading your home every night, registering the position, name and contents of every single object you own, making it searchable from house.google.com.Unless you nail a robots.txt to your front door, that is... [ Reply to ThisRe:I'd like my house indexed by the_hellspawn (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:04PMMaybe you're thinking about this? by Schwarzchild (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:48PM Re:I'd like my house indexed (Score:5, Funny) by jacksonj04 (800021) <nick@tn-uk.net> on Sunday October 09, @06:30PM (#13752850) (http://nick.tn-uk.net/) locate:keys | pocketlocate:phone | pocketlocate:underwear -girlfriend | rm [ Reply to This | ParentRe:I'd like my house indexed by WilliamSChips (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:28PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.i hereby propose by circletimessquare (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:38PM Re:i hereby propose (Score:5, Funny) by b100dian (771163) on Sunday October 09, @06:33PM (#13752862) (http://b100dian.lx.ro/) ...Google indexed it all in 6 days, and took a rest in the 7th... [ Reply to This | ParentRe:i hereby propose by AsmCoder8088 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:55PMOooo.... No it's the giant brains all over again by technoextreme (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:41PMRe:Oooo.... No it's the giant brains all over agai by jrockway (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @11:59PM Everybody! (Score:5, Funny) by Slashdiddly (917720) on Sunday October 09, @05:42PM (#13752584) Please stop creating new information and let Google catch up! You can resume later. [ Reply to ThisRe:Everybody! by ZakuSage (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @09:26PM Yeah right.. (Score:5, Funny) by Klowner (145731) on Sunday October 09, @05:42PM (#13752588) (http://klowner.com/) It's going to take them a hell of a lot longer than that, considering my car keys are always moving. [ Reply to This When I read the summary (Score:5, Funny) by colonslashslash (762464) on Sunday October 09, @05:42PM (#13752589) (http://www.tlm-project.org/) I immediately thought of the Futurama episode - The Why of Fry - where the giant brains build the brainsphere and assimilate all the knowledge in existance, before attempting to destroy the entire universe so no new information can be added.Googlesphere anyone? [ Reply to ThisRe:When I read the summary by tdemark (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:14PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. On a related note... (Score:5, Interesting) by RyanFenton (230700) on Sunday October 09, @05:42PM (#13752590) I wonder how many man-years it would take to listen to all the music and video that could be indexed. Be interesting at least to find out what the order of magnitute would be - millions, or perhaps billions or trillions of man-years of unique recorded audio and video? It would have to be a game of gross estimation - but it would at least put into perspective how much material is out there, even if most of it is boring "security" footage, compared to the scope of our lives.It'd be interesting, if, perhaps in a couple generations, we could have a cheap media volume that contained "recorded media, prehistory - to - 2050ad"... if the media that exists today even survives a couple generations, and copyrights aren't extended indefinetly. The idea of an indexing system that can even put all that information into a meaningful context would be fascinating to consider though, if it could be possible.Ryan Fenton [ Reply to ThisRe:On a related note... by lukej (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:45PMRe:On a related note... by kbahey (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:06PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Competition? (Score:4, Interesting) by psst (777711) on Sunday October 09, @05:44PM (#13752600) (http://www.ece.utexas.edu/~miftakhu/) From the article:Of the approximately 5 million terabytes of information out in the world, only about 170 terabytes have been indexed, he said earlier during his speech.Storing 5 million terabytes has got to cost a lot of resources. It would be very inefficent if every competing search engine stored that much data. Makes me wonder if it would make more sense to nationalize Google's index and share it amongst competitors (just like it makes more sense for goverments to build airports and share them amongst airlines rather than every airline building its own airports). [ Reply to ThisRe:Competition? by drrngrvy (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:50PM Re:Competition? (Score:5, Insightful) by Shihar (153932) on Sunday October 09, @06:29PM (#13752847) Nationalize Google? Are you joking me or just insane? You want to take one of the most innovative and successful companies that the US has right now a nationalize it!?I have a better idea, how about you just send out a government hit squad to kill to put a bullet between the eyes of single entrepreneur in the US. It will accomplish the same sort of freeze in the growth of innovative small businesses but look far less insane. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Competition? by Halfbaked Plan (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:00PMMOD PARENT DOWN -- BASHING GOOGLE!!! by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:06PMRe:Competition? by Hoch (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:33PMRe:Competition? by claes (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:54PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Competition? by ajdecon (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:30PMRe:Competition? by rm999 (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:34PMRe:Competition? by Tony Hoyle (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:30PMRe:Competition? by rm999 (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:53PMRe:Competition? by (arg!)Styopa (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @11:07PMFalse alternative by ChrisMaple (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @11:19PMI'm curious... by DeepBlueDay (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:46PMRe:I'm curious... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:52PMRe:I'm curious... by obli (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:57PMRe:I'm curious... by Hogwash McFly (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:05PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Re:I'm curious... (Score:5, Insightful) by vidarh (309115) <vidar@hokstad.name> on Sunday October 09, @06:37PM (#13752887) (http://www.hokstad.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday March 09, @11:42AM) I take it from that comment that you don't see much value in a thirteen year old girl's blog? What about a thirteen year old girls diary?Like Anne Frank's [wikipedia.org]?Fact is, it's incredibly hard to determine today what will have value tomorrow. Most of those thirteen year old girls (or 20-something geek guys) blogs will have no historical value. But some of those people will grow up to have a profound impact on the world (or they may not grow up, but still have a profound impact, as was the case with Anne Frank). It may be ten years from now. Or 50.Who knows what the writing they do now might tell us about what brought them wherever they end up? When people write diaries on paper chances are reasonable they'll survive and show up in an attic somewhere. But as more and more content get online, we also risk facing the loss of entire generations worth of many types of information to bit rot and simple lack of foresight. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:I'm curious... by DeepBlueDay (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:02PMRe:I'm curious... by Vellmont (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @08:50PMRe:I'm curious... by Lucractius (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:09PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:I'm curious... by Hurricane78 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:53PMAssumptions made by Slashdiddly (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:46PMcopyright? by bcrowell (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:47PM 300 Years? Feed Those Pigeons! (Score:5, Funny) by Comatose51 (687974) on Sunday October 09, @05:47PM (#13752621) Obviously they're not feeding those pigeons [google.com] enough. Time to buy some quality feeds Google. Maybe even slip in some uppers every now and then. If all else fails, maybe it's time to consider the parrot upgrade. They're a lot more expensive but their index/poop ratio is much better. [ Reply to ThisRe:300 Years? Feed Those Pigeons! by ggvaidya (Score:1)Monday October 10, @12:14AM what is considered information? (Score:4, Insightful) by bwy (726112) on Sunday October 09, @05:48PM (#13752624) I'd like to see their definition of information. Certainly, a lot of things that are already of common interest are on the net. Occasionally, I find things that aren't available online but the greatest majority of the time google is able to find what I want.To further the example: at work we have several filing cabinets that haven't been opened in years. There are lots of papers and stuff in there, I can vouch for that. Some might consider it "information." But in reality all that stuff could be burned and I doubt it would make the slightest difference in the way the future rolls out. None of it is stuff that would ever be needed by an IRS audit or anything like that either. Does google consider this kind of stuff as part of their efforts? Because I think they can safely ignore it. [ Reply to ThisI Call Bullshit by Anonymous Coward (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @05:49PMRe:I Call Bullshit by Hogwash McFly (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:09PMRe:I Call Bullshit by TRS80NT (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:35PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Won't happen... by mbone (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @05:51PM Makes no sense (Score:5, Insightful) by bobintetley (643462) on Sunday October 09, @05:52PM (#13752658) (http://www.rawsontetley.org/) We did a math exercise? What exercise?To estimate the time involved, you surely need to know the size of the information involved (don't quote me that bunkum about 170 terabytes in TFA - yes I did read it), and to know the size you need to know what all the information is, which you can't (and surely new information is created all the time?).This translates as "I pulled my finger out my ass, waved it in the air and came up with 300 years." [ Reply to ThisRe:Makes no sense by LnxAddct (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:19PMMy guess: by imsabbel (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @07:23PMRe:My guess: by TeknoHog (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @09:40PMRe:My guess: by Punboy (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @09:55PM300 Years Makes Sense for 5 Exabytes and growing.. by Praxiteles (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @11:13PMfiltering by Snorklefish (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:54PMAnd the Winner is... by bitspotter (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:05PMRe:And the Winner is... by Fermatprime (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:12PMRe:And the Winner is... by Sepodati (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:41PMRe:And the Winner is... by Prof.Phreak (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:48PMNow the real question is.... by SensitiveMale (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:09PMRe:Now the real question is.... by Tony Hoyle (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:46PMKeyword is "them" by gmuslera (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:12PMHow much of that would be - by Elad Alon (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:14PMRe:How much of that would be - by fbjon (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:51PMFuture Knowledge? by arpk4n3 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:16PMOf course it is! by yoink23 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:19PM webcams and other continuous data collectors (Score:4, Interesting) by G4from128k (686170) on Sunday October 09, @06:21PM (#13752795) This analysis must exclude entire categories of continuous data collection devices such as webcams, data loggers, OS log files, sensing equipment etc. All jokes aside about porn on webcam's, I can imagine that future historian would love such a rich data source on how people lived their lives, what they have in their surroundings, etc.The point is that many current systems spew a huge volume of low value (but nonzero value) data (multiple MB or GB/day/device). The lack of storage means most of this is not captured and is thus never indexed.Even massive companies can't keep all their data. Wal-Mart stores on the order of 460 TB in their data warehouse, but only has room for the last 13 months of data or so. At 138 million customers per week, they only have room for a paltry 59kB per customer per week. [ Reply to Thisa small margin of error by CupBeEmpty (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @06:22PMRe:a small margin of error by eonlabs (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:15PMRe:a small margin of error by AxelBoldt (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:22PMRe:a small margin of error by Rick Genter (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:07PMRe:a small margin of error by Prof.Phreak (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:55PMGoogle Purge by kflash15 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:25PMBetter Hurry it Up by tavilach (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:25PMBut how long is that... by NMZNMZNMZ (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:26PMLooking at their calculations... by xquark (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:27PM was he joking ? (Score:5, Insightful) by flynt (248848) on Sunday October 09, @06:27PM (#13752840) "We did a math exercise and the answer was 300 years," Schmidt said in response to an audience question asking for a projection of how long the company's mission will take. "The answer is it's going to be a very long time."Since this was in response to an audience member's question, does anyone else think he was joking? Because it is such an outlandish question from an information theory and modeling point of view, perhaps he was mocking it? "Ah yes, we just came up with an equation and it should take 294.59 years." I think this also makes sense in light of his next comment, which was made on a more serious note. I interpret it, "We really didn't use an equation, it will obviously take a long time though." This is how I understod his comments, and I may be wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if some reporter picked up on this "joke" and put it up as "news". [ Reply to ThisRe:was he joking ? by The-Pheon (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @06:57PMRe:was he joking ? by The-Pheon (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:05PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:was he joking ? by wakdjunkaga (Score:1)Monday October 10, @12:50AMIt will take... by nicobn (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:32PMRe:It will take... by eonlabs (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:32PMRe:It will take... by fbjon (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @09:10PM300 years? No way! by Evil-Dragon (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:36PMRe:300 years? No way! by Tony Hoyle (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:39PMHmmm by vandalman (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:40PM299 years, 364 days by kentrel (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:41PMTwo things to consider by Slant675 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:42PMI peer into my crystal ball by RoboPimp_3000 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:48PMShampoo advertising by Ch*mp (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:54PMgoogle in 300 years by click2005 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:02PMRe:google in 300 years by telstar (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:30PMYeah Right. by Adam Avangelist (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:06PMfrom a logical point of view by ronsta (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:10PMRe:from a logical point of view by Halfbaked Plan (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:07PMPrecision! by Palal (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:11PMNaturally That Isn't True by Master of Transhuman (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:11PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Define "all" ... by jabberwock (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:25PMScientific and Mathematical bunk by markdj (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:42PMnonsense by stiefvater (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @07:49PM300 years later... by LinuxRulz (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:05PMUh oh by harlows_monkeys (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @08:18PMGoogle has indexed / the web is only 170 TB? by Captain Perspicuous (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:31PMA fatuous answer to an imprecise question by Jeremy Singer (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:41PMWhat if "$#^$^" can do it in 3 years ? by managedcode (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:55PMAccelerating returns? by ellcry (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:57PMIt would still be incomplete by melvo (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:05PMFuturama..... by artoffacts (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:23PMI thought the answer was 42. by wcrowe (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @09:49PMI doubt it by MichaeLuke (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:59PMWouldn't it be easier by Allnighterking (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:01PMWhat If by Yehooti (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @10:17PMHuman Genome by Hao Wu (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @10:24PMDistributed Indexing by DocSavage64109 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @10:41PMIndexing the Porn by ozTravman (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @11:32PMIndexing Information No Longer Relevant by zod2008 (Score:1)Monday October 10, @12:14AMHuman Genome? by NetNinja (Score:1)Monday October 10, @12:34AMRe:300 years from now? by BlueCodeWarrior (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:24PM23 replies beneath your current threshold.