Google is a on the slippery slope. With so much information about us, as it continues to gather more, the value of that information is growing. The business of knowing more about us and selling it for enormous profit is nothing new. The three major credit bureaus have been doing it for decades. Not only do those bureaus collect and sell out data, with each year they add more detailed information with nearly no accountability. Potentially, Google has even more information on us, ranging from heath records to the mac addresses of our Wifi routers. The company has been very busy cozying up to pols and bureaucrats in Washington, and I’m sure squelching any complaints about invasion of our privacy is high on its lobbyists punch lists.

Google, which is said be “agonizing” over the balance between user privacy and advertising opportunities. It’s a long piece that you should read in full, but essentially the WSJ claims that Larry Page and Sergey Brin have gone from strictly forbidding any efforts to track users online to a more subtle interpretation of their famous “don’t be evil” motto which allows them to leverage user data and sell finely targeted ads without “exploiting customers.”  (Endgadget)

Google has been able to assemble so much information so quickly by offering an ever growing suite of services, mostly free.  By putting all of you data in Google’s basket, you’re enabling them, with implied consent. At least that’s how the company will spin it when the privacy cries get louder.

There a few notes floating around the ‘Net that Google is testing bits and pieces of Google Voice internally. Even rumors that a possible upgrade to GMail may include a Google Voice client popup –

The new feature will allow users to make voice calls over the Internet and it’s likely that it won’t be limited to Gmail. In April, TechCrunch reported that Google “built a Google Voice desktop application to make and receive calls” and that the application is tested internally. Google used technology from Gizmo5, a VoIP service acquired by Google last year.

For now, Google Voice’s integration with Gmail is not publicly available.

A Google Voice VoIP service with land line tie in? The consequences are rather formidable –

• Google probably becomes the instant largest VoIP phone company on the planet. Assuming that they tie this to every GMail account, that is in the cards by default. GMail outclasses Skype by at least an order of 2X.
• The paid for VoIP service collapses? Or the price points become inordinately cheap. Why pay for it if I can get if for free?
• Skype’s propietary signaling format bites them back. What has kept most folks with Skype is market size. If a larger player shows up with open protocols, it makes Skype’s technical decision problematic. That become a huge problem for them as they are now a start up again.
• The Skype-Verizon deal is toast.
• It makes the job of the folks trying to control the Internet that much harder. Hard to enforce net rules is they are precluded 1st Amend. speech provisions, which is what the FCC was supposed to guard in the first place.

As a technology this is not earth shaking, its just VoIP. But if Google follows their usual — free basic, paid premium scenarios — it is a massive realignment of the VoIP space as a business. It would also portend a serious challenge to the big three wireless carriers. A smart upstart could offer a unlimited data plan coupled with Android/GMail/Voice/SMS and blow their competitors voice/data plan pairings out of the water. (Hear me out there T-Mobile??)

This is a dark swan for telecom.

Linky

Update:

You must appreciate the remorse I have when I read this –

When Google acquired Gizmo5, a Skype competitor, in November Google Voice users rejoiced – presumably they’d be getting a much needed soft phone on the desktop for users to make and receive calls through Google Voice.

We confirmed that the application had been rewritten and was being tested internally at Google in April. Some Google employees continue to use the app, we’ve confirmed.

But don’t expect it to launch publicly any time soon, we’ve heard from multiple sources. Why? an internal religious debate about desktop software.

Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin don’t want Google to be in the business of creating software outside of the browser, say our sources. And that’s consistent with Google’s product launches over the last several years.

Of course it ignores the efforts that Google is putting into developing their own Chrome browser, Chrome operating system and Android operating system, as well as a variety of mobile apps – all are software that installs on computers or mobile devices.

But there may be a hard line when it comes to pure desktop apps like Google Voice. So the team has been sent back to the drawing board to try to make a workable soft phone that will work entirely within the browser using HTML 5.

So the upshot is, it ain’t gonna happen this year or next. Damn! Apparently part of a religious war internally. Personally I think this is a bad move on Google’s part. There is only so much you can do with Search. But with telephony, when you can do it big, there are all sorts of avenues where not only is search manifest in telephony use but it provides yet another source of revenue apart from search. Smart companies diversify income streams.

I need a scotch…..

Linky.

Update II :

Ok, so my scorecard was only half right! The upshot is, Google Voice is out of the Labs and into the wild! Wow. Integrated with Google Mail? Nope. I want that, but the fact that I can freely sign up for Google Voice without the invite is a good start.

Will be a busy weekend. Have a few clients that want this integrated into their websites. Loving it. The current release of GV won’t however put Google in the MaBell business however. It depends on an existing phone line to operate. But merely as a call director it has many uses for lots of people.

It could be the tipping point for the broadcast, cable and satellite businesses as we currently know them. While the cable industry worked hard to get everyone to buy into it’s TV Anywhere concept, the real growth has come in the form of streaming devices like Roku’s little internet stream box. With Google’s Google TV announcement earlier this week, followed by the Apple rumor mill ballyhooing a fruit cult stream box this could be there year net video will take control of the big screen.

With so much video m0ving across the net, consumers should start demanding bigger pipes to better carry HD streams. With the duopoly’s myopic focus almost entirely on wireless, it’s a great opening for new competition. Now, if we could just re-open the last mile……..

First let me say that I think offering an encrypted link to Google’s search engine is a great idea. It makes it much more difficult for most of those who do not mean you well to monitor your surfing. But there’s a rub: That encryption doe nothing to prevent Google from capturing and using your search activity any way it sees fit.

The encryption makes it incredibly difficult for anyone in between your computer and Google’s servers to see what search terms you use or what results Google sends back. Additionally, when you click through a search result on Google’s new secure page, your browser will not send along “referrer data” revealing the search terms you used.

The new option does not, however, keep Google from knowing and storing what you searched on and does not make you anonymous to them. It’s designed to prevent eavesdroppers from analyzing the URL or content to see the search terms you are sending to Google, or the results. (Wired)

Considering that the casual user is oblivious to how much of their personal information and activity is captured by Google. the hoopla over encrypted search could give a distorted sense of security. Left unresolved is can Google be trusted with your data?

When Google says “do no evil”, I suppose it also grants to itself to be the sole judge of what is “evil”. For example, street view’s visually revealing nature  has been under fire in the UK for many months now. The true irony is that the UK has more surveillance camera in place than any other nation on the planet. Maybe big brother just doesn’t like competition?

Now, in the former land of Nazi transmitter finder trucks, Google is alleged to be recoding Wifi information while recording imagery in it’s street view vehicles.

Google’s roving Street View spycam may blur your face, but it’s got your number. The Street View service is under fire in Germany for scanning private WLAN networks, and recording users’ unique Mac (Media Access Control) addresses, as the car trundles along.

Germany’s Federal Commissioner for Data Protection Peter Schaar says he’s “horrified” by the discovery.

“I am appalled… I call upon Google to delete previously unlawfully collected personal data on the wireless network immediately and stop the rides for Street View,” according to German broadcaster ARD.  (The Register)

Sure, your Wifi SSID and MAC address are pretty much public information anyway, but is it OK for a purveyor of location based services to be collecting them in mass along with other location specific data? Does anyone else see this as a big problem?

If this rumor is anywhere near accurate, then the days of the wireline Telcos are pretty much over. –

Last November Google acquired Gizmo5, a VoIP service that competed with Skype by making P2P VoIP calls as well as making and receiving calls with POTS (normal landlines) and mobile phones.

Gizmo5 fills some of the holes in the Google Voice product, particularly providing an endpoint for calls. Currently Google Voice users must assign their Google Voice phone number to an actual phone to make and receive calls.

Google never commented on how they might use Gizmo5’s technology. But we’ve confirmed that they have now built a Google Voice desktop application to make and receive calls. From a user perspective, this will let Google Voice users take calls right from their desktop.

Why? Convenience and cost. First you can’t beat free or near free. With Google’s dominance in the back haul internet market nearly all their backbone traffic is paid for or traded for. Then the sheer convenience of being able to marry Google Voice features to a VoIP client makes for a hard to beat combination.

If Google pulls this off, the Telcos are going to be forced to consider going before Congress for regulatory or tax relief or both. They can’t keep pouring monies down a rat hole of a technology that is losing users at a double digit rate. Nor can they continue to carry the recapture costs on their books from a tax perspective for a CO that will never see its useful life reached.

Linky.

We’ve listened as duopoly CEO’s have repeatedly stated the we don’t need more speed and that we’re hogging scarce bandwidth. We’ve seen a new FCC broadband plan that is nothing more than a massive power grab by that agency that insures no competition for the duopoly. If you believe these people, then I’m a lone lunatic in the blogosphere who is suffering from a delusion of low bandwidth paralysis.

But I’m not alone. Google announce plans to offer a tiny sliver of American society ultra high speed broadband as a part of a test. Response has been overwhelming and extremely competitive:

Since we announced our plans to build experimental, ultra high-speed broadband networks, the response from communities and individuals has been tremendous and creative. With just a few hours left before our submission deadline, we’ve received more than 600 community responses to our request for information (RFI), and more than 190,000 responses from individuals (we’ll post an update with the final numbers later tonight). We’ve seen cities rename themselves, great YouTube videos, public rallies and hundreds of grassroots Facebook groups come to life, all with the goal of bringing ultra high-speed broadband to their communities. (Google Blog)

Why are there so many other broadband crazies out there? Not only will this new network make downloads and uploads nearly instant, it will enable boundless new opportunity. That means new higher paying jobs, better education, and a much more level playing field for all to take advantage of the opportunities this kind of speed enables. This will not be reported on the evening news. With ultra fast broadband, the evening news is history.

That’s Google Buzz of course. Google botched the first rule of Internet Service — let the customer choose. I was introduced to Buzz by it just showing up on my Gmail account. Which I promptly turned off.

Google has since come to its senses on the deployment issue and is working on resolving certain privacy concerns. Buzz itself clearly shows it underpinnings as a response by Google to its social rival Facebook. But it also shows that Google is not immune to the ‘absurdity at the edges’ that befall many companies. The idea being that taken to extremes good ideas like Search and Gmail can be extended into places that are really not a good fit. Buzz as service in Gmail being a prime example.

Buzz is probably a much better fit if it were part of Google Reader, Scholar and News. I am sure they will figure that out.

Lets just get to the meat of it ok. Then more after the jump —

Google is planning to launch an experiment that we hope will make Internet access better and faster for everyone. We plan to test ultra-high speed broadband networks in one or more trial locations across the country. Our networks will deliver Internet speeds more than 100 times faster than what most Americans have access to today over 1 gigabit per second, fiber-to-the-home connections. We’ll offer service at a competitive price to at least 50,000 and potentially up to 500,000 people.

From now until March 26th, we’re asking interested municipalities to provide us with information about their communities through a Request for information (RFI), which we’ll use to determine where to build our network.

That’s from the website.

Now notice this is not some high speed to the head end sort of offer. They specifically say FTH. So they intend to go right to the curb. Their testing will test some 50-500k patrons. What is not clear, is that a single site or a mix of smaller sites.

Google goes on to say they will provide —

* Next generation apps: We want to see what developers and users can do with ultra high-speeds, whether it’s creating new bandwidth-intensive “killer apps” and services, or other uses we can’t yet imagine.

* New deployment techniques: We’ll test new ways to build fiber networks; to help inform, and support deployments elsewhere, we’ll share key lessons learned with the world.

* Openness and choice: We’ll operate an “open access” network, giving users the choice of multiple service providers. And consistent with our past advocacy, we’ll manage our network in an open, non-discriminatory, and transparent way.

What I find of particular interest is the commitment to an open transport layer. A place where anyone can play? ISP and Google? If true that would be a game changer in the data transport marketplace. Fact if true it would complete a vision that was the reason that this blog was created for — create an open backbone and permit service providers to battle it out in the marketplace of products and services.

We keep our fingers crossed.

Linky.

Which in this case means that if Google wants to deliver it, and you want to use it, Google WILL find a way to do so. Even if the device mfr says NO! Well in this case its AT&T/Apple saying no to a Google Voice app on the iPhone.

Now I understand why AT&T did not want it, it hurts their voice traffic income. But do both of these partners realize the semi truck load of a mistake they just made? Had Google followed their original plan they would have locked the Google Voice into the app space of the iPhone architecture. Doing so would have meant Google duplicating that for any subsequent smart phone with the attendant hassles and costs of handling multiple variants of software. Now?

Now Google has turned the software and the iPhone into a VoIP TERMINAL. Unleashed from the underlying architecture Google Voice can now live on any device capable of handling HTML5. Any smart phone, MID, Nettop, Netbook, you name it. That single denial has unleashed a monster, at least for a Telco.

Very dumb AT&T.

Linky.