Showing posts with label google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label google. Show all posts
10.05.2013
Google-ad-sense-keyword-for-2011-2012-2013
 |
| TOP 50 GOOGLE AD-SENSE KEYWORD OF 2012 - 2013 - 2014 |
MESOTHELIOMA-LAW-FIRM - DONATE-CAR-TO-CHARITY-CALIFORNIA - DONATE-CAR-FOR-TAX-CREDIT
Google ad-sense keyword for 2011,2012,2013 - use this keyword in website while writing content in it... this will a lot to earn more revenue through GOOGLE AD SENSE - If you have already Google ad sense use these keyword while writing content in your blog, it may fetch more money to through blog / website very easily - these keyword are more use full in generating more money through ad sense.
10.03.2013
HOW TO PLAY AUDIO FILE IN GOOGLE DRIVE - HERE IS A SOLUTION
Do your have problem in playing audio formatted file in GOOGLE DRIVE here is a solution to play audio formatted file in your drive account. This post will help a people those how deal with audios in their drive account .there are many application to add in drive account but this is one of them to play audio formatted file in your account click on above image to see more
DO YOU WANT K7 ANTIVIRUS GET AT VERY LOW COST
10.07.2012
VIEWDLE AND GOOGLE ARE NOW FRIENDS FOR A PROJECT
Google’s Motorola Mobility recently announced that it has acquired augmented reality and image recognition company, Viewdle. Motorola has not yet disclosed the price of the acquisition but industry speculation holds it between $30 million-$45 million.
According to a Motorola spokesperson:
“Motorola Mobility today announced that it has acquired Viewdle, a leading imaging & gesture recognition company. Motorola and Viewdle have an existing commercial agreement and have been collaborating for some time. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed.”
Found in 2006, Ukrainian based company Viewdle now has its headquarters in Silicon Valley. Among the company’s investors are Best Buy Capital, BlackBerry Partners Fund, Qualcomm, KCP Capital and Anthem Venture Partners.
We expect the Google-owned mobile manufacturer to bring some new augmented reality or image recognition features to some of its upcoming devices, and are excited to see what they may be. Google has previously developed AR apps like Google Goggles, and demoed upcoming heads up display glasses, in its ongoing Project Glass endeavor.
BY...
BALAJI SRINIVASAN
9.26.2012
GOOGLE VENTURE
A radically different kind of venture fund
Our hands-on teams work with portfolio companies full-time on design, recruiting,
marketing, and engineering. Start-up Lab is a dedicated facility and educational program
where companies can meet, learn, work, and share. We invest hundreds of millions
of dollars each year in entrepreneurs with a healthy disregard for the impossible
INVESTING RULES
Before I became a VC in 2009, I was an active angel investor for about ten years. During that time, I got exposed to the age old debate about the relative importance of team, market and product when making an investment decision.
People always argued about these things (and probably always will). Some say the most important factor is market because team and product can always change, but if the market and the tailwinds are big enough, a company can make many mistakes and thrive. Others argue for team because a great team in a mediocre market will change markets. Still others argue for product, especially in today’s age where word-of-mouth is so easy to spread through social media. Product-market fit can be such a powerful force that it can compensate for a weak team.
During those ten years, I also developed some more unconventional investing rules that have served me well when I’ve obeyed them and punished me when I’ve gone against them. They are designed to guard me against my biases and adverse instincts (I think everyone needs explicit processes to protect themselves from known blind spots or vulnerabilities). I’d argue that it was the slow realization of these rules that changed me from a losing angel investor in my first five years to a successful one in the next five. These rules are important enough to me that I’ve printed them out on my wall to serve as a daily reminder
Rule #1: Invest only in teams that don’t need you.
I’ll start with the most controversial and most easily misinterpreted rule.
I came to this rule by making what I see as a classic mistake of entrepreneurs who begin to invest. When I heard a pitch, as an entrepreneur, I would get excited about what *I* would do that with idea. The wheels in my head would begin turning about how I might approach sales, what features I would develop as head of product, or what distribution partners I might sign up.
The problem? What I thought didn’t matter. Sure, I could advise the company and give the teams my ideas (bad or good). But, in the end, it was *not my company* and my influence on it was very limited. Being an entrepreneur made me helpful as an advisor to the business but in many ways it made me a bad listener when it came to evaluating teams.
About five years into angel investing, I was beginning to suspect I had this problem (approaching investing solely from an entrepreneurial point of view). One day, I was talking about it with Marc Andreessen and he coined the fix for me, saying, ”I only invest in teams that don’t need me.” Once I started following that advice, investment decisions became more clear and my results improved markedly.
I want to note a very important subtlety with this rule. When I say “invest in teams that don’t need you,” that doesn’t mean that you won’t mutually *benefit* from each other and be materially better as a result of your collaboration. Take one of my investments, the gaming company Kabam. Kabam has a tremendously strong team and they have more expertise than I ever will in gaming. And yet, I believe that our collaboration makes each one of us better in a meaningful way.
So, only invest in teams that don’t need you, but don’t conflate ‘need’ and ‘benefit’.
Rule #2: Impatience is the enemy
Despite being a private market investor, I love the public markets. When I was considering working in the public markets as a full time gig, a friend of mine and a successful public market investor, David Siminoff, suggested that I read the shareholder letters from Warren Buffet from 1977 to today as a narrative. It took me awhile, but I read them all back to back. When read as a history like that, it gave me an interesting perspective on how a great investor like Buffet handled a wide range of economic conditions, from high inflation to low inflation, from economic expansion to recession.
Perhaps the most poignant lesson, stated again and again and again, was the notion that the biggest enemy in investing is our own impatience. We have a strong desire to *make money now*, and when unchecked, that leads to bad decisions. It namely lets us talk ourselves into investments that we shouldn’t really make. It lets us create excuses for teams that aren’t as good as they should be, or for markets that really aren’t there or aren’t as big as we’d like.
Rule #3: Know why you want to own something: FOMO or insight?
In my opinion, FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) drives a tremendous amount of human behavior and certainly a lot of investor behavior. There is always the hot deal of the month that’s being chased by many investors, who, if honest, are leaning in partially because other investors are pursuing it as well. They fear missing out on a deal that might turn out to be great. And this fear drives their desire to become an owner in the business.
Knowing that FOMO is a big behavior driver in investing is great for entrepreneurs to exploit. And many do if they can create a kind of feeding frenzy around their deal.
Resisting FOMO is not easy and the reason that I have the rule on my wall is (1) denial — most people don’t want to admit they’re ruled by or vulnerable to FOMO and (2) perception — it’s really hard to know you’re captured by FOMO.
This may sound obvious, but it’s often missed. You need a reason to invest – a critical insight – and not just fear that you might be missing out on a good deal. The tricky part is that it’s easy to convince/fool yourself that you have an insight when you’re really just fearful and rationalizing. That’s why, I think, you need a process to determine if you’re being driven by FOMO or insight.
For me, that process is a question I force myself to consider.
I ask myself, “If the company hit a rough patch (and most do), do I have insight into the business to be able to help?” When I ask myself that question, and I’m willing to be honest with myself, the answer about if I’m pursuing something because of FOMO can become more clear.
Two years ago, my friend and fellow investor Steve Vassallo (Foundation Capital), brought to my attention a deal in the finance arena. I spent two weeks working on it and I *loved* it. I was ready to bring it forward to my partners when I asked myself the “FOMO or insight” question, and I realized that if this company hit the skids, I did not have the insight to help. And, though it was tough because I *really* wanted to do the deal, I said ‘no.’
Only time will tell whether I was right on that particular deal, but I feel that the FOMO or insight question helps keep me honest.
Rule #4: In poker and investing, the goal is to make good decisions, not to make money.
This rule came from a three-day poker camp I went to seven years ago. One of the pros got up to the front of the room and asked the question, “What’s the goal of poker?” Of course, someone put their hand up and fell into the trap. “To make money” they said. Wrong. “The goal is to make good decisions, not to make money,” countered the instructor. If you make good decisions — better, more consistent decisions than the other guy — then you will end up making money.
In poker, if you approach the game to make money as opposed to making good decisions, you can fall prey to things like going on ’tilt’ after a bad beat, feeling ‘lucky’, continuing to fire bluffs at an opponent who’s clearly shown you he’s willing to call you all the way down, or playing in games that you can’t afford. When you hunger only to make money *now*, then you end up making bad, mostly emotional, decisions.
To apply this to investing may sound heretical. But, it is my belief that the goal of an investor is to make good investing decisions and good operational decisions with their companies. If they do that, then money will follow (sure, not always, but more often than not). Yes, all investors are measured on making money. But paradoxically, I think the best way to maximize that outcome is to focus on making the best set of decisions with your companies, rather than only focus, at every turn, on making money.
So there you have it. Four unconventional investing rules I’ve developed over ten years. As I said, they’re primarily designed to protect me against my built-in biases or vulnerabilities. My hope is that they’re helpful to you as well.
People always argued about these things (and probably always will). Some say the most important factor is market because team and product can always change, but if the market and the tailwinds are big enough, a company can make many mistakes and thrive. Others argue for team because a great team in a mediocre market will change markets. Still others argue for product, especially in today’s age where word-of-mouth is so easy to spread through social media. Product-market fit can be such a powerful force that it can compensate for a weak team.
During those ten years, I also developed some more unconventional investing rules that have served me well when I’ve obeyed them and punished me when I’ve gone against them. They are designed to guard me against my biases and adverse instincts (I think everyone needs explicit processes to protect themselves from known blind spots or vulnerabilities). I’d argue that it was the slow realization of these rules that changed me from a losing angel investor in my first five years to a successful one in the next five. These rules are important enough to me that I’ve printed them out on my wall to serve as a daily reminder
Rule #1: Invest only in teams that don’t need you.
I’ll start with the most controversial and most easily misinterpreted rule.
I came to this rule by making what I see as a classic mistake of entrepreneurs who begin to invest. When I heard a pitch, as an entrepreneur, I would get excited about what *I* would do that with idea. The wheels in my head would begin turning about how I might approach sales, what features I would develop as head of product, or what distribution partners I might sign up.
The problem? What I thought didn’t matter. Sure, I could advise the company and give the teams my ideas (bad or good). But, in the end, it was *not my company* and my influence on it was very limited. Being an entrepreneur made me helpful as an advisor to the business but in many ways it made me a bad listener when it came to evaluating teams.
About five years into angel investing, I was beginning to suspect I had this problem (approaching investing solely from an entrepreneurial point of view). One day, I was talking about it with Marc Andreessen and he coined the fix for me, saying, ”I only invest in teams that don’t need me.” Once I started following that advice, investment decisions became more clear and my results improved markedly.
I want to note a very important subtlety with this rule. When I say “invest in teams that don’t need you,” that doesn’t mean that you won’t mutually *benefit* from each other and be materially better as a result of your collaboration. Take one of my investments, the gaming company Kabam. Kabam has a tremendously strong team and they have more expertise than I ever will in gaming. And yet, I believe that our collaboration makes each one of us better in a meaningful way.
So, only invest in teams that don’t need you, but don’t conflate ‘need’ and ‘benefit’.
Rule #2: Impatience is the enemy
Despite being a private market investor, I love the public markets. When I was considering working in the public markets as a full time gig, a friend of mine and a successful public market investor, David Siminoff, suggested that I read the shareholder letters from Warren Buffet from 1977 to today as a narrative. It took me awhile, but I read them all back to back. When read as a history like that, it gave me an interesting perspective on how a great investor like Buffet handled a wide range of economic conditions, from high inflation to low inflation, from economic expansion to recession.
Perhaps the most poignant lesson, stated again and again and again, was the notion that the biggest enemy in investing is our own impatience. We have a strong desire to *make money now*, and when unchecked, that leads to bad decisions. It namely lets us talk ourselves into investments that we shouldn’t really make. It lets us create excuses for teams that aren’t as good as they should be, or for markets that really aren’t there or aren’t as big as we’d like.
Rule #3: Know why you want to own something: FOMO or insight?
In my opinion, FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) drives a tremendous amount of human behavior and certainly a lot of investor behavior. There is always the hot deal of the month that’s being chased by many investors, who, if honest, are leaning in partially because other investors are pursuing it as well. They fear missing out on a deal that might turn out to be great. And this fear drives their desire to become an owner in the business.
Knowing that FOMO is a big behavior driver in investing is great for entrepreneurs to exploit. And many do if they can create a kind of feeding frenzy around their deal.
Resisting FOMO is not easy and the reason that I have the rule on my wall is (1) denial — most people don’t want to admit they’re ruled by or vulnerable to FOMO and (2) perception — it’s really hard to know you’re captured by FOMO.
This may sound obvious, but it’s often missed. You need a reason to invest – a critical insight – and not just fear that you might be missing out on a good deal. The tricky part is that it’s easy to convince/fool yourself that you have an insight when you’re really just fearful and rationalizing. That’s why, I think, you need a process to determine if you’re being driven by FOMO or insight.
For me, that process is a question I force myself to consider.
I ask myself, “If the company hit a rough patch (and most do), do I have insight into the business to be able to help?” When I ask myself that question, and I’m willing to be honest with myself, the answer about if I’m pursuing something because of FOMO can become more clear.
Two years ago, my friend and fellow investor Steve Vassallo (Foundation Capital), brought to my attention a deal in the finance arena. I spent two weeks working on it and I *loved* it. I was ready to bring it forward to my partners when I asked myself the “FOMO or insight” question, and I realized that if this company hit the skids, I did not have the insight to help. And, though it was tough because I *really* wanted to do the deal, I said ‘no.’
Only time will tell whether I was right on that particular deal, but I feel that the FOMO or insight question helps keep me honest.
Rule #4: In poker and investing, the goal is to make good decisions, not to make money.
This rule came from a three-day poker camp I went to seven years ago. One of the pros got up to the front of the room and asked the question, “What’s the goal of poker?” Of course, someone put their hand up and fell into the trap. “To make money” they said. Wrong. “The goal is to make good decisions, not to make money,” countered the instructor. If you make good decisions — better, more consistent decisions than the other guy — then you will end up making money.
In poker, if you approach the game to make money as opposed to making good decisions, you can fall prey to things like going on ’tilt’ after a bad beat, feeling ‘lucky’, continuing to fire bluffs at an opponent who’s clearly shown you he’s willing to call you all the way down, or playing in games that you can’t afford. When you hunger only to make money *now*, then you end up making bad, mostly emotional, decisions.
To apply this to investing may sound heretical. But, it is my belief that the goal of an investor is to make good investing decisions and good operational decisions with their companies. If they do that, then money will follow (sure, not always, but more often than not). Yes, all investors are measured on making money. But paradoxically, I think the best way to maximize that outcome is to focus on making the best set of decisions with your companies, rather than only focus, at every turn, on making money.
So there you have it. Four unconventional investing rules I’ve developed over ten years. As I said, they’re primarily designed to protect me against my built-in biases or vulnerabilities. My hope is that they’re helpful to you as well.
8.19.2012
HAPPY-NEWS-BY-GOOGLE
HAPPY-NEWS-BY-GOOGLE
கூகுள் போல வருமா?
கூகுளில் பணியாற்றும் ஒருவர் இறந்துவிட்டால் அவரின் குடும்பத்தை பொருளாதார ரீதியாக பாதுகாக்கிறது கூகுள் நிறுவனம்.
அங்கு பணிபுரியும் நபர் இறந்துவிட்டால் அவர் வாங்கிய சம்பளத்தில் 50% மாதந் தோறும் அவரின் குடும்பத்திற்கு பத்து வருடங்களுக்கு வழங்கப்படுகிறது.
குழந்தைகள் இருந்தால் அந்த குழந்தைகளின் மாதம் ஆயிரம் டாலர் வீதம் 23 வயது வரை வழங்கப்படுகிறது.
கூகுள் நிறுவனத்தின் பங்குகள் வைத்திருந்தால் அதற்குரிய தொகை உடனடியாக வழங்கப்படும்.
இந்தச் சலுகை வழங்க பதவி, பணி அனுபவ காலம் கணக்கு கிடையாது.
இன்று வேலைக்கு சேர்ந்து சிறுது மாதத்தில் அசம்பாவிதம் ஏற்பட்டாலும் பாரபட்சம் பார்க்காமல் இந்த சலுகைகள் வழங்கப்படும்.
FOR MORE INFORMATION VISIT BALAJI SRINIVASAN
6.20.2012
MARK-ZUKERBERG-POSITION
MARK ZUKER BERG positioning at the token no of 14th place in the richest man in AMERICA.
Face Book owners lead the top position compare to GOOGLE (CEO'S) Sergey Brin & Larry Page.
They are behind the ZUKERBERG.Currently Mark hold $17.5 B . Sergey Brin & Larry Page both hold ($16.7 B).
Compare to Facebook and Google owners Mark positioning the young at the age of 27.
Both at the age of 38
4.03.2012
Google's Project Glass
Google Project Glass--shows off heads up display AR glass
Google has officially released has been rumor for a past couple of months - and heads up with display of glasses that will allows the user 2 argumented with reality features..., and directed for all interaction with paired Android devices.. with we connect easily..
The first rumoure of this device it starts in the month of February,the GOOGLE was expected to launch with HUD glasses sometimes. @ tis stage however, Google augmented finally with reality glasses and remains a concept,and finally there was no working models have been shownoff.
....
This device is Being developed in Google X Labs Google's augmented reality glass are expected to cost rate as much as smart phone,between $200 and $700. Apart from pictures...it also released a video, to show the consumers just app technology is capable of.u can use all the G+ applications to be used in this DEVICE share the VIDEO if interesting..... EVERY THING IS SEEMS MUCH INTERESTING IN VIDEO...
Im waiting for a device to be launched..
This device is Being developed in Google X Labs Google's augmented reality glass are expected to cost rate as much as smart phone,between $200 and $700. Apart from pictures...it also released a video, to show the consumers just app technology is capable of.u can use all the G+ applications to be used in this DEVICE share the VIDEO if interesting..... EVERY THING IS SEEMS MUCH INTERESTING IN VIDEO...
Im waiting for a device to be launched..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)