undefined | Better HN

0 pointswslh13y ago0 comments

Google Reader is irreplaceable, it is not only about reading RSS. That is the easy part. It is about going back in time and accessing all past feeds in an organized way (it is difficult to rebuilt that from crawling and web scraping). If you add a blog now you can read articles that are not present in the current feed.

Google Reader is the core of my information diet. Not twitter. Thousands of blogs starred, liked, and commented. An interesting feature that you couldn't replace is automatic translation: reading a russian blog asmit was written in english. Once I shared one of its articles and one friend asked me if I knew russian or if it was a joke my share! Because obviously the share was in the original language.

Google is evil. While I can understand a business decision, there are ways to hand it over to other companies or organizations.

I share some of my previous criticism:

- Extraction of Main Text Content Using the Google Reader NoAPI: http://blog.databigbang.com/extraction-of-main-text-content/

-Google Search NoAPI: http://blog.databigbang.com/google-search-no-api/

- The Data Portability Fact Sheet: http://blog.databigbang.com/the-data-portability-fact-sheet/

- Reverse Engineering and the Cloud: http://blog.nektra.com/main/2012/06/01/reverse-engineering-a...

0 comments

TillE13y ago

> It is about going back in time and accessing all past feeds in an organized way

Yes, exactly. Google Reader is literally the only way to find past episodes of some podcasts - the files are still up, but after a site redesign nothing else links to them.

_delirium13y ago

It's unclear to me if they're also discontinuing the Google Feed API: https://developers.google.com/feed/

This is quite valuable because it includes historical data, including stuff that's dropped off the currently available RSS feeds (many sites only list recent posts in their feeds).

lobster_johnson13y ago

Oh, and it looks like the feed API may not be used to save anything; Google's API ToS [1] document has the following text:

    Unless expressly permitted by the content owner
    or by applicable law, you agree that you will
    not, and will not permit your end users to, do
    the following with content returned from the APIs:

    * Scrape, build databases or otherwise create 
    permanent copies of such content, or keep cached 
    copies longer than permitted by the cache header;
    * Copy, translate, modify, create a derivative 
    work of, sell, lease, lend, convey, distribute, 
    publicly display or sublicense to any third party;
    * Misrepresent the source or ownership; or
    * Remove, obscure, or alter any copyright, 
    trademark or other proprietary rights notices,
    falsify or delete any author attributions, legal
    notices or other labels of the origin or source 
    of material.

The first two bullet points are the ones that apply. You can't use the feed API to fetch a bunch of feeds and make them available through an app, for example.

[1] https://developers.google.com/terms/

lobster_johnson13y ago

According to the ToS at https://developers.google.com/feed/terms:

    Google will announce if we intend to discontinue
    or make backwards incompatible changes to this 
    API or Service. We will use commercially
    reasonable efforts to continue to operate the 
    Google Feed API without these changes until 
    April 20, 2015, unless (as Google determines in 
    its reasonable good faith judgment):

    * required by law or third party relationship 
    (including if there is a change in applicable 
    law or relationship), or
    * doing so could create a security risk or 
    substantial economic or material technical 
    burden.

    This Deprecation Policy doesn't apply to 
    versions, features, and functionality labeled 
    as "experimental."

Of course, who knows what "commercially reasonable efforts" really mean.

nl13y ago

Wait.. so they have a service that in your words is so good it is irreplaceable.. and taking it away makes them evil?

That's pretty strong!

wslhOP13y ago

Yes, their historical data can't be rebuilt. A little bit like what happened with USENET and Google buying DejaNews. Nobody has that data.

nl13y ago

So go and grab the data you care about while it's there?

I'm trying to understand why Google suddenly gets responsibility for archiving the entire internet for incompetent websites.

2 more replies

rpgmaker13y ago

I believe this is called getting "scroogled".

fauigerzigerk13y ago

It is about going back in time and accessing all past feeds...

I don't think Reader can find anything that Google search doesn't know. Using site:sitename.com in a regular Google search should bring up past entries as well.

sp33213y ago

Reader actually archives feeds, so there are a lot of defunct pages in Reader that Search can't find.

wslhOP13y ago

Also, it is strange that they fund driverless cars but close Google Reader! why not contract a small team of interns to keep the site running?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointswslh13y ago0 comments

Google is evil. While I can understand a business decision, there are ways to hand it over to other companies or organizations.

I share some of my previous criticism:

- Extraction of Main Text Content Using the Google Reader NoAPI: http://blog.databigbang.com/extraction-of-main-text-content/

-Google Search NoAPI: http://blog.databigbang.com/google-search-no-api/

- The Data Portability Fact Sheet: http://blog.databigbang.com/the-data-portability-fact-sheet/

- Reverse Engineering and the Cloud: http://blog.nektra.com/main/2012/06/01/reverse-engineering-a...

0 comments

TillE13y ago

> It is about going back in time and accessing all past feeds in an organized way

Yes, exactly. Google Reader is literally the only way to find past episodes of some podcasts - the files are still up, but after a site redesign nothing else links to them.

_delirium13y ago

It's unclear to me if they're also discontinuing the Google Feed API: https://developers.google.com/feed/

This is quite valuable because it includes historical data, including stuff that's dropped off the currently available RSS feeds (many sites only list recent posts in their feeds).

lobster_johnson13y ago

Oh, and it looks like the feed API may not be used to save anything; Google's API ToS [1] document has the following text:

    Unless expressly permitted by the content owner
    or by applicable law, you agree that you will
    not, and will not permit your end users to, do
    the following with content returned from the APIs:

    * Scrape, build databases or otherwise create 
    permanent copies of such content, or keep cached 
    copies longer than permitted by the cache header;
    * Copy, translate, modify, create a derivative 
    work of, sell, lease, lend, convey, distribute, 
    publicly display or sublicense to any third party;
    * Misrepresent the source or ownership; or
    * Remove, obscure, or alter any copyright, 
    trademark or other proprietary rights notices,
    falsify or delete any author attributions, legal
    notices or other labels of the origin or source 
    of material.

The first two bullet points are the ones that apply. You can't use the feed API to fetch a bunch of feeds and make them available through an app, for example.

[1] https://developers.google.com/terms/

lobster_johnson13y ago

According to the ToS at https://developers.google.com/feed/terms:

    Google will announce if we intend to discontinue
    or make backwards incompatible changes to this 
    API or Service. We will use commercially
    reasonable efforts to continue to operate the 
    Google Feed API without these changes until 
    April 20, 2015, unless (as Google determines in 
    its reasonable good faith judgment):

    * required by law or third party relationship 
    (including if there is a change in applicable 
    law or relationship), or
    * doing so could create a security risk or 
    substantial economic or material technical 
    burden.

    This Deprecation Policy doesn't apply to 
    versions, features, and functionality labeled 
    as "experimental."

Of course, who knows what "commercially reasonable efforts" really mean.

nl13y ago

Wait.. so they have a service that in your words is so good it is irreplaceable.. and taking it away makes them evil?

That's pretty strong!

wslhOP13y ago

Yes, their historical data can't be rebuilt. A little bit like what happened with USENET and Google buying DejaNews. Nobody has that data.

nl13y ago

So go and grab the data you care about while it's there?

I'm trying to understand why Google suddenly gets responsibility for archiving the entire internet for incompetent websites.

2 more replies

rpgmaker13y ago

I believe this is called getting "scroogled".

fauigerzigerk13y ago

It is about going back in time and accessing all past feeds...

I don't think Reader can find anything that Google search doesn't know. Using site:sitename.com in a regular Google search should bring up past entries as well.

sp33213y ago

Reader actually archives feeds, so there are a lot of defunct pages in Reader that Search can't find.

wslhOP13y ago

Also, it is strange that they fund driverless cars but close Google Reader! why not contract a small team of interns to keep the site running?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse