Google's search engine from 2001 - Look at what I found

  • Thread starter Thread starter RetardedBastard
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Engine Search
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
9 replies · 4K views
RetardedBastard
Messages
113
Reaction score
0
Google's search engine from 2001 -- Look at what I found!

In celebration of their 10th anniversary, Google has posted it's search engine results and data going all the way back to January 2001: http://www.google.com/search2001.html

Sounds interesting... so I decided to compare search results from today and those from 2001. Here are the results (now / 2001):

"physicsforums" (17,500,000 / 0)
Barack Obama (71,200,000 / 771)
"Sarah Palin" (20,300,000 / 0)
iPod (418,000,000 / 1,300)
wikipedia (286,000,000 / 681)


But THIS is the most interesting gem I discovered:
search terms: "fannie mae" "freddie mac" collapse (785 results)

and this little jewel from all the way back in 2000 during a testimony before the House Banking Committee (the first link from google's 2001 archived search results):
Clearly Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created for “good” purposes – now the issue is whether the special privileges they’ve been granted, specifically their implicit government “insurance” policy, act to distort and destabilize the marketplace.​
(http://web.archive.org/web/20010916040429/www.cei.org/RemarksReader.asp?ID=1035" )

Oh wait, I'm not done:

"Our worry is that GSEs could become the savings and loans of the coming decade, with taxpayers getting the bill for a bailout that will make the S&L crisis look like chump change."

If Freddie and Fannie continue their attempts to expand their reach into subprime and jumbo mortgages, there is a real danger of collapse​
(http://web.archive.org/web/20010410165029/www.cagw.org/mediacenter/newsrel/search/00-03-09.htm" )

Wow! They were saying this in 2000! It's quite disheartening to see that our current economic crisis could have been prevented had the government paid attention within the last 8 years!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


RetardedBastard said:
In celebration of their 10th anniversary, Google has posted it's search engine results and data going all the way back to January 2001: http://www.google.com/search2001.html

Sounds interesting... so I decided to compare search results from today and those from 2001. Here are the results (now / 2001):

"physicsforums" (17,500,000 / 0)
Barack Obama (71,200,000 / 771)
"Sarah Palin" (20,300,000 / 0)
iPod (418,000,000 / 1,300)
wikipedia (286,000,000 / 681)


But THIS is the most interesting gem I discovered:
search terms: "fannie mae" "freddie mac" collapse (785 results)

and this little jewel from all the way back in 2000 during a testimony before the House Banking Committee (the first link from google's 2001 archived search results):
Clearly Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created for “good” purposes – now the issue is whether the special privileges they’ve been granted, specifically their implicit government “insurance” policy, act to distort and destabilize the marketplace.​
(http://web.archive.org/web/20010916040429/www.cei.org/RemarksReader.asp?ID=1035" )

Oh wait, I'm not done:

"Our worry is that GSEs could become the savings and loans of the coming decade, with taxpayers getting the bill for a bailout that will make the S&L crisis look like chump change."

If Freddie and Fannie continue their attempts to expand their reach into subprime and jumbo mortgages, there is a real danger of collapse​
(http://web.archive.org/web/20010410165029/www.cagw.org/mediacenter/newsrel/search/00-03-09.htm" )

Wow! They were saying this in 2000! It's quite disheartening to see that our current economic crisis could have been prevented had the government paid attention within the last 8 years!

This is proof now that Obama has more national exposure than Sarah Palin. I hope Biden brings up these numbers tonight in the debate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Wow! They were saying this in 2000! It's quite disheartening to see that our current economic crisis could have been prevented had the government paid attention within the last 8 years!

there's nothing new here. People saw this coming 10 years ago and encouraged this type of business. Its just another scenario where the rich get richer and the poorer get poorer. I'm more than sure the government knew about it, they just didn't do anything because a lot of them made money off it.
 


Hmm. Ron Paul got more than four times the hits of Biden, Palin and Obama combined.

"John McCain" - 158,000
"Sarah Palin" - 0

"Barak Obama" - 31
"Joe Biden" - 3,240

"Ron Paul" - 13,400
 


B. Elliott said:
Hmm. Ron Paul got more than four times the hits of Biden, Palin and Obama combined.

"John McCain" - 158,000
"Sarah Palin" - 0

"Barak Obama" - 31
"Joe Biden" - 3,240

"Ron Paul" - 13,400
I did half of those searches just gathering information against him. Lots of searches isn't always a good thing.
 


Evo said:
I did half of those searches just gathering information against him. Lots of searches isn't always a good thing.

Well good or bad. I just used it as a gauge for overall knownness in '01.
 


B. Elliott said:
Hmm. Ron Paul got more than four times the hits of Biden, Palin and Obama combined.

"John McCain" - 158,000
"Sarah Palin" - 0

"Barak Obama" - 31
"Joe Biden" - 3,240

"Ron Paul" - 13,400

Ron Paul must have been relatively QUITE well-known considering that then governor Mike Huckabee only got 10500 hits and soon to be released "Windows XP" only 1,580.
 


Evo said:
I did half of those searches just gathering information against him. Lots of searches isn't always a good thing.

Evo, I can not believe you havn't said/done this yet... "David Deutsch" gets 3,380 results!
 


Evo said:
I did half of those searches just gathering information against him. Lots of searches isn't always a good thing.

It's not counts of searches, it's counts of websites Google has indexed. But, same idea applies...they could all be websites talking about how bad they are.