Warning: presume all links in this post are NSFW.
Users of Google registered IP addresses contributed to Wikipedia entries including “Amateur Pornography“, the “List of male performers in gay porn films” and “Mutual Masturbation” according to data pulled from Wikiscanner. Other sexually related edits include the pages for sex show and the talk:#$%^ sex; a particular person is using a computer with a Google IP address to share the details of his sex life with the world.
Another user decided to clean up one Wikipedia entry by correcting the definition to read “”Motherf&$@er means to f&$@ your mother also known as incest,” which of course made the entry that much more clearer.
User’s of IP addresses registered to Google’s Corporate IT Department edited a page pertaining to something called “Breast expansion fetishism” and these two which I won’t name lest I haven’t upset enough people with the language in the post already.
Overall though, people using Google IP addresses are a fairly tame bunch, with no evidence that they have been editing the pages of Google competitors, the story I had initially looked to research. However, there were two edits by people using Google IP addresses to pages relating to Google; the first removes the term Googly from the Google (Verb) Entry, the second bizarrely deletes mention of Google having an office in Ireland.
Does this IP Range include the publicly available wifi network set up by Google? If so, then these edit could have been done by anyone, not just Google employees.
Come on Duncan! This is a BS post (your bored).
where do you find this sort of info out?
It will be so funny if this makes the homepage of Digg - They LOVE this sort of thing
BUT…
Let’s not forget that anyone who has the WebAccelerator will automatically give the Google IP Address Range.
And Tens of Thousands have it installed as a proxy
In any group as large as the employee base of Google there will always be a bunch of people doing almost anything imaginable. This article might as well have said something like “a number of Americans are editing entries in Wikipedia about sex”.
How about you guys get back to telling interesting stories about interesting technologies and companies. Is there really nothing else going on that is more worthy than this? If you email me I could easily name 5 companies that are doing cool stuff that you have never reported on.
Chris
It’s why I noted a “Google owned IP” as opposed to saying outright it was someone from Google (I can’t be 100% sure), although the Google Corporate IT Department IP’s wouldn’t be public.
Good trash (wondering how Valleywag didn’t come up with this first…)
Duncan,
Fair call, my mind made the leap to Google employees all on it’s own
i have never read anything so awkward on a business related site.. nor would i expect to
lol - every co. has a few bad apples.
if you’re bored, you need an outlet
more clearer?
Whats the problem about editing such sites? Cmon, no one cares if they edit pages about sex or gay dudes. At least statistics say that every 10th person is at least bisexual…
It would be a much bigger issue if they would be editing their competitors pages.
You guys should come to europe.
So what? Employees at Google are humans too.
What a shitty post. But thanks for the links. Good reading.
Must be a very slow news day.
Those people at Google have all the fun. I want to work there and get kinky too!
Duncan, you’re American, right? :rolleye:
And why on earth would we care? This is TC, Duncan, not Valleywag or some stupid tabloid. If you couldn’t get a decent story on them editing competitors doesn’t mean you can dump this crap on us.
Of course, we welcome all new well-referenced knowledge of educational value!
Hilarious
Actually, this is probably from people using Google as a proxy (like via http://translate.google.com).
The internet is for porn.
Sex, one of the most important, amazing and good things in our lives…is there anything more to say?
What’s the point of the entry?
Google similarly set up an Irish subsidiary, Google Ireland Holdings Ltd, which in 2004, its first year, helped the company avoid paying about 131 million dollars in U.S. taxes.
http://www.commondreams.org/he.....224-05.htm
That’s probably why they don’t want people knowing about their Irish subsidiary.
Did you really write ‘more clearer’?
lol
i guess that means that google engineers are people too
“TechCrunch, founded on June 11, 2005, is a weblog dedicated to obsessively profiling and reviewing new Internet products and companies. In addition to new companies, we will profile existing companies that are making an impact (commercial and/or cultural) on the new web space. TechCrunch is edited by Michael Arrington, who also writes a companion blog, CrunchNotes.”
Though Google as a whole does fit into the “making an impact on the new web space” genre, I don’t see how this article, or a few as of late, fit into the apparent mission of the site. I’d rather see less articles, if there is less news (which I doubt there are LESS startups out there right now). Articles like this seem, to me, to dilute the quality of TechCrunch. This is not a gossip site. This is not a rumor site. This (as I and apparently others have thought) is a site about new sites and technologies that are shaping (*cringe*) Web 2.0.
Can we get clarification if this is the type of content that will be on the site from this way forward? Or will the direction go back to the ‘roots’ of the site?
@27 - MikeP
I sure agreed 100% with you on the quality of TC.. LOoooOK at the the amount of advertisements that is sitting on the right column, page loading is getting slower and slower. I guess their “CEO” figured out a way to increase revenue to justify her “fee”. I personally do not think that there are no startups out there that they can write about, it’s become this high and mighty game, where startups need to chase TC editors and get their attention to have TC writers to even be bothered with them. I’m sure the are tons of entrepreneurs writing to them and were getting their door slammed in the face, because they think they’re TC and they are high and mighty. They seldom write about no-name startups.
I’m sure TC writers have done something right.. don’t you. They’re great when they wrote about inviteshare and then bought inviteshare - wow awesome. But then again there needs to be more rights then wrongs at this point of the game since they “think” that they’re the almighty reviewer and trend spotter of the web2.0
My advice to other entrepreneurs, stop emailing them, try Allen at http://www.centernetworks.com. He is one genuine guy who is passionate about startups and discovering startups. Check out Allen’s last few blog posts, they’re all about startup demo reviews, entrepreneurs’ interviews about how to get it done. He even has a FREE, yes FREE, startup tips ebook: http://www.centernetworks.com/.....onth-ebook
Tell me what TC has given the entrepreneurs so far. Duncan - take a hint.
Horrible entry……Why waste our time with this garbage?
Are we going to start seeing pictures of Britney and Lohan on techcrunch tomorrow?
Come on now.
“no evidence that they have been editing the pages of Google competitors, the story I had initially looked to research.”
Duncan, that would have been a good point to decide this would nor make it to a post…
Oh those Google folk! They’re a fun bunch.
Grammar quibble: “Users of Google registered IP addresses contributed to Wikipedia entries including…”
You should hyphenate “Google-registered” to avoid confusion in this sentence. Otherwise the first 6 words can be read with an entirely different meaning. It’s awkward.
Good find Nick Denton.. oh no.. I am not reading Valleywag.
BS post mate.. leave this to Valleywag and do what TC does best.. will ya!
This is the only TechCrunch post that actually made me angry. I think Duncan genrally does good work and I’ve considered defending him when others have ciriticized in the past, but this kind of pandering is horrible. I’ll still read TechCrunch because it’s still worth it, but please, don’t go down this path. I’m speaking to the whole editorial staff at Tech Crunch, since it is not just Duncan’s responsibility. The original research was valid (Google possibly whitewashing their Wikipedia entries) but when that didn’t pan out, the story should have died.
Try writing real posts.
I don’t know if this post was techcrunch worthy…
Googlers are faggots.
I’ve got to say that I agree with Shawn (comment #34) on this one. The initial idea and research was solid, but when it didn’t turn out the way you’d suspected, the story should have been shelved, not turned into a gossip piece.
Just wait til google lights up the world with all of it’s dark fiber. Will those be Google.com or google.net hostnames?
microsoft loves editing it’s own products:
http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.....=&ip4=
also you can use asterisks* when doing a whois lookup on whois.arin.net or on the web form.
Also checkout al jazeera’s edits
Here’s my schools edits, tulane
Do you people think the staff writers of TC( Arrington included) actually care about your opinions on the quality of what’s presented here? I know several start-ups that contacted TC only to be told they only cover companies funded by the thieves in the Valley. It’s all about Alexa numbers( which Arrington says he doesn’t trust (wink). Eyes equate to expensive ad rates. We’re now seeing cheap tabloid journalism. Everyone has a price. Mike has his and he is looking for the offer. Any takers?
Extra! Extra! Google employs real people.
I fail to see how this will ever come to be highly problematic for anyone.
Of course, it’s a fun read ; )
Interesting read, just not from TechCrunch. Please stick to Tech related content. Thanks
And another way: just infected PC in office network with proxy
Didn’t noticed this opinion above.
‘more clearer’ - 100%.