Incoming links: Internet Archive Open Library
To avoid duplication when citing multiple pages: Section "How to use a single source multiple times in a Wikipedia article?"
A good big sample definition:There is also
<ref name="googleStory">{{cite book |last1=Vise |first1=David |author-link1=David A. Vise |last2=Malseed |first2=Mark |author-link2=Mark Malseed |title=The Google Story |date=2008 |publisher=Delacorte Press |url=https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780385342728}}</ref>title-link to link to a wiki page. But it is incompatible with url= for Internet Archive Open Library links which is a shame.Their reference markup is incredibly overengineered, convoluted, and underdocumented, it is unbelivable!
Use the reference:
This is a fact.{{sfn|Schweber|1994|p=487}}Define the reference:
===Sources===
{{refbegin|2|indent=yes}}
*{{Cite book|author-link=Silvan S. Schweber |title=QED and the Men Who Made It: Dyson, Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga|last=Schweber|first=Silvan S.|location=Princeton|publisher=University Press|year=1994 |isbn=978-0-691-03327-3 |url=https://archive.org/details/qedmenwhomadeitd0000schw/page/492 |url-access=registration}}
{{refend}}sfn is magic and matches the the author last name and date from the Cite, it is documented at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:SfnUnforutunately, if there are multiple duplicate
Cites inline in the article, it will complain that there are multiple definitions, and you have to first factor out the article by replacing all those existing Cite with sfn, and keeping just one Cite at the bottom. What a pain...You can also link to a specific page of the book, e.g. if it is a book is on Internet Archive Open Library with:
{{sfn|Murray|1997|p=[https://archive.org/details/supermenstory00murr/page/86 86]}}For multiple pages should use
pp= instead of p=. Does not seem to make much difference on the rendered output besides showing p. vs pp., but so be it:{{sfn|Murray|1997|pp=[https://archive.org/details/supermenstory00murr/page/86 86-87]}}Nothing phenomenally new on the early days to add on top of Video "Nerds 2.0.1 excerpt about Cisco (1998)", but a few new good points:
- Cisco at one point became the largest company by market capitalization. This wore off a bit as of 2020.They used this overvalued stock in part to buy many other (often also overvalued) up and coming companies. This acquisition spree strategy was apparently not the norm at the time. rohitnair.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/cisco-history-cisco-systems-history-and-trivia-brand-history-and-trivia/ mentions they have bought more than 140 companies since, and that they call this strategy "Build, Buy And Partner"
- a big part of what Cisco did was to allow cheap local communication in-campus. At that time, the ARPANET was already up and running, but their "routers", called Interface Message Processors were very expensive at about $100,000, and to send data across the campus you had to go through them, which meant expensive bandwidth. The routers sometimes failed, and the fallback was to send students around with disks: "sneakernet". They needed new local protocols and hardware to efficiently connect different campus networks.
- Sandy Lerner nude photo
- Cisco was a pioneer in having an Internet support forum. Customers could also help one another. This was fundamental in scaling support, as they grew so fast it would be impossible to hire a support team large enough without the help of the forum.
- Cisco gave out source code to some customers who would then implement protocols they cared about, and Cisco would then merge it back
Has some good mentions, but often leaves you wanting more details of how certain things happened, especially the early days stuff.
Does however paint a good picture of several notable employees, and non-search projects from the early 2000's including:
- the cook dude
- porn cookie guy
- the unusual IPO process
Paints a very positive picture of the founders. It is likely true. They gave shares generously to early employees. Tried to allow the more general public to buy from IPO, by using a bidding scheme, rather than focusing on the big bankers as was usual.
The introduction mentions that Google is very interested in molecular biology and mining genetics data, much like Ciro Santilli! Can't find external references however...
Two of the most compelling areas that Google and its founders are quietly working on are the promising fields of molecular biology and genetics. Millions of genes in combination with massive amounts of biological and scientific data are an excellent match for the Google search engine, the tremendous database the company has in place, and its immense computing power. Already, Google has downloaded a map of the human genome and is working closely with biologist Dr. Craig Venter and other leaders in genetics on scientific projects that may lead to important breakthroughs in science, medicine, and health. In other words, we may be heading toward a time when people can google their own genes.
The book gives good highlight as to why Google became big: search was just an incredibly computationally intensive task. From very early days, Largey were already making up their own somewhat custom compute systems from very early days, which naturally led into Google custom hardware later on. Google just managed to pull ahead on the reinvest revenue into hardware loop, and no one ever caught them back. This feels more the case than e.g. with Amazon, which notoriously had to buy off dozens of competitors to clear the way.
Cover of The Google Story
.