Google+ annuncia 10 milioni di utenti ma la rete non regge
Quando si parla di numeri, soprattutto riguardanti un prodotto in fase di lancio, occorre prendere con le pinze i dati ufficiali, spesso leggermente gonfiati per dare l'idea di un immediato successo. Se parliamo però di Google, anche se le cifre sembrano esorbitanti finiscono per risultare quantomeno credibili. Il successo di G+ del resto sta occupando l'intera scena informatica mondiale, per cui l'annuncio di Paul Allen del traguardo dei 10.000.000 di utenti nella giornata di oggi non sembra tanto frutto dell'ottimismo quanto dell'unanime consenso e plauso seguito all'annuncio del nuovo social network di casa Mountain View.
Per ciò che riguarda il futuro prossimo di Google+, le previsioni annunciano un raddoppio degli utenti nel giro di una settimana, a condizione che lo staff tecnico non opti nuovamente per la limitazione degli inviti, un escamotage a cui BigG potrebbe ricorrere però alla luce dei diversi problemi tecnici che sta affrontando la piattaforma.
Nonostante l'ottimismo che regna a Mountain View neanche alla casa madre si aspettavano una risposta tanto entusiasta da parte degli utenti, con una vera e propria corsa forsennata ad iscriversi al social network che ha colto un po' alla sprovvista anche i tecnici di Google. Ecco quindi che l'afflusso improvviso di account (secondo Allen con picchi di oltre 2 milioni in meno di due giorni) ha mandato in tilt il sistema, creando un effetto loop delle notifiche che sono state recapitate decine e decine di volte ripetutamente, creando non poco disturbo a chi le riceveva anche via mail.
A questo problema si aggiungono altre disfunzioni che la piattaforma sta avendo, come quello della resa pubblica dei nostri post nel caso fossero ribattuti da i membri di una cerchia con i quali li abbiamo condivisi, più altre difficoltà in merito alla ricerca dei contatti e così via. È più che comprensibile che la fase beta del progetto, non ancora conclusa, preveda modifiche in corso d'opera e problemi legati all'afflusso massiccio di utenti, ma se le stime di Allen dovessero dimostrarsi reali, G+ si troverebbe davanti un'escalation di iscrizioni di enorme portata, con tutte le difficoltà che questo aumento vertiginoso può comportare.
Ecco il post su G+ con cui Paul Allen ha annunciato le sue previsioni per la giornata di oggi.
Paul Allen|Google+ To Pass 10,000,000 Users Tomorrow (on 7/12)
As I promised on Saturday night, I have finished updating my Google+ membership model with new data and re-estimated the Google+ user base. My surname-based analysis shows that the number of Google+ users worldwide reached 7.3 million yesterday (July 10) – up from 1.7 million users on July 4th. That is a 350% increase in six days. The userbase is growing so quickly that it is challenging for me to keep up, since the number of users of any given surname (even the rare ones I am tracking) seems to be climbing every day. More impressive than last week's growth is the astonishing growth in users from yesterday at mid-day to tonight — a 30% jump. My latest estimate tonight shows approximately 9.5 million users. This suggests that 2.2 million people have joined Google+ in the past 32-34 hours.
I project that Google will easily pass 10 million users tomorrow and could reach 20 million user by this coming weekend if they keep the Invite Button available. As one G+ user put it, it is easy to underestimate the power of exponential growth. My model is simple. I start with US Census Bureau data about surname popularity in the U.S., and compare it to the number of Google+ users with each surname. I split the U.S. users from the non-U.S. users. By using a sample of 100-200 surnames, I am able to accurately estimate the total percentage of the U.S. population that has signed up for Google+. Then I use that number and a calculated ratio of U.S. to non-U.S. users to generate my worldwide estimates. My ratio is 1 US user for every 2.12 non-U.S. users. That ratio was calculated on July 4th through a laborious effort, and I haven't updated it since. That is definitely a weakness in my model that I hope to address soon.
The ratio will likely change over time. Since I have been tracking this same cohort of surnames from my first day, I am able to accurately measure growth over time. I am not claiming perfect accuracy, but I do think the model is sound. A quant has suggested a mathematical formula that I can use to calculate a range of Google users with a 99% level of accuracy, and one of my employees is working on that math now. I hope to include that in future models. Here is one way to look at my model. Imagine the U.S. government in 2020 has no money left. I know that's hard to imagine, but stay with me. Imagine they wanted to conduct a 2020 census and subsequent decennial censuses with a degree of accuracy (let's say 95%) and to do it on a shoestring budget.
They had complete data for 2010 – the population and growth rates for every city and town in the country. To do 2020, they could just take a random sampling of 100 cities and towns across the U.S. that were representative and conduct the census JUST for those cities every 10 years. If those 100 cities averaged the same growth rates as the rest of the country, then their decennial censuses would be fairly accurate but very inexpensive. (Obviously the US example won't work and shouldn't be tried, since the purpose of the U.S. census is in part to determine Congressional representation – so a complete census must be done in the entire country.) But my project is like that – a low-budget sampling.
I have randomly selected 100 uncommon U.S. surnames and I am tracking the number of Google+ users with those names – updating my counts every 2-3 days. I am assuming that the growth in G+ users with those surnames is similar to the growth in G+ users with the other 150,000 or so surnames in the U.S. If I had resources to include 500 or 1,000 surnames in my sample, then I believe my model would be more accurate. But my time and budget available for this project are small, so it is what it is. And then I take the 2.12 – 1 non-US to US ratio to complete the calculations. I'm not sure how many more times I'll update this. I do believe it is quite accurate. Much more accurate than a guess. It is based on sound starting data, but some of my assumptions may not be perfect. I look forward to Google announcing actual user numbers, so I can stop working on this in all my spare time. Or, perhaps, someone will discover an advanced query that actually works – that returns unique user profile pages but no pages that contain posts.
People keep suggesting queries will work, but so far, I have found that none of them is accurate for user counts. For reference, here are my earlier posts on this subject:
4.5 million estimate on 7/9 (actually 12:15ish on 7/10)
