Google celebrates April's final half-moon with an interactive doodle game
Interestingly, it is not only interactive but also educational, as it prompts the users to play against the moon to test their knowledge of the lunar cycle. The users have to compete with the moon by matching lunar phases. They will also earn points for each right pairing. Last month it came up with March's full moon doodle, titled 'Rise of the Half Moon in March'.
The Purple Moon
The April's Half-moon Google Doodle is a purple-shaded moon with a card game that will let you know more about the lunar cycle. This game has three levels and completing the final level equals victory and rewards.
When you click on the doodle, you'll see an overview of the game before it commences.
Half Moon
As the moon changes its shape in the sky every night, it leads to different moon phases. A half-moon happens when you can see only half of the moon's face lit up by the sun's light.
Google Doodle
When you open the homepage of Google, instead of a plain logo, you see a creative, colourful and animated doodle which is used to celebrate special occasions, birth anniversaries or death anniversaries of important people, festivals and even nature. This special feature of Google is not only creative but also informative. Basically, Google replaces its logo with a doodle for a day to celebrate the occasion or to pay tribute to that person of importance. The first Doodle was published in 1988, and it was named 'Burning Man Festival'.
This is the fourth Google Doodle dedicated to the Moon this year. In January it showcased 'Rise of the Half Moon January', followed by 'Rise of the Half Moon February' and 'Rise of the Half Moon March'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Bengaluru techie was mocked by interviewer: 'People like you won't make it to Google.' Her clapback has the internet's attention
A Bengaluru-based techie's job interview experience is striking a chord across the internet — and not just because of where she ended up. Arpita Das, a Software Engineer currently working at Google, took to X to share a bitter but ultimately satisfying story from her job hunt. In her post, she recalled being grilled by an interviewer from a mid-level startup during a system design round. He pushed her to estimate everything from CPU costs to infrastructure planning — practically everything except, as she joked, physically building the data centre. But what really stuck with her was what happened when she stumbled. According to Arpita, the interviewer smirked and said, 'This is why people like you won't make it to big companies like Google or Meta.' That sting didn't last long, though — today, she works at Google. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Technology MCA Data Science Design Thinking Finance Project Management Cybersecurity Others PGDM others Leadership Data Analytics CXO Healthcare Management Degree Product Management Data Science Public Policy Artificial Intelligence healthcare MBA Digital Marketing Operations Management Skills you'll gain: Duration: 12 Weeks MIT xPRO CERT-MIT XPRO Building AI Prod India Starts on undefined Get Details — Arpitaaa01 (@Arpitaaa01) by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Why this MBA won't break the bank SRM Online Learn More Undo 'I'm not bragging,' she wrote. 'Just wondering why some folks gatekeep based on their own insecurities.' The post quickly gained traction, with people rallying behind her. One user cheekily asked where the interviewer works now. Arpita's reply? He's still at the same company. Internet reacts Others jumped in to share similar experiences and show support for Arpita. One user called her journey the best form of revenge, encouraging her to keep going strong. Another pointed out that when they conduct interviews, they focus on what they can learn from the other person, rather than trying to break them down. One particularly striking response came from someone who had also faced gender bias in the hiring process. She shared how a former interviewer doubted her ability to handle onsite work simply because she was a woman. Ironically, that interviewer was fired within a year and a half, while she went on to perform not just her own responsibilities, but his as well — and did a better job at it. Arpita's story isn't just a personal win — it's a reminder of how far kindness and humility can go in an industry where gatekeeping and egos still often get in the way. As per her X bio and LinkedIn, she is a graduate from VIT, with a in Computer Science. She joined Google just a couple of weeks back and shared a note on LinkedIn. Arpita Das shared that she has joined Google as an SDE II, where she's working on Gemini at Google DeepMind. She called it an incredible opportunity and is excited to be part of a team pushing the boundaries of AI, she said she's grateful to be learning from some of the best minds in the field.
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
Is ChatGPT making us outsource thinking?
Back in 2008, The Atlantic sparked controversy with a provocative cover story: Is Google Making Us Stupid? In that 4,000-word essay, later expanded into a book, author Nicholas Carr suggested the answer was yes, arguing that technology such as search engines were worsening Americans' ability to think deeply and retain knowledge. At the core of Carr's concern was the idea that people no longer needed to remember or learn facts when they could instantly look them up online. While there might be some truth to this, search engines still require users to use critical thinking to interpret and contextualise the results. Fast-forward to today, and an even more profound technological shift is taking place. With the rise of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, internet users aren't just outsourcing memory – they may be outsourcing thinking itself. Generative AI tools don't just retrieve information; they can create, analyse and summarise it. This represents a fundamental shift: Arguably, generative AI is the first technology that could replace human thinking and creativity. That raises a critical question: Is ChatGPT making us stupid? As a professor of information systems who's been working with AI for more than two decades, I've watched this transformation firsthand. And as many people increasingly delegate cognitive tasks to AI, I think it's worth considering what exactly we're gaining and what we are at risk of losing. AI and the Dunning-Kruger effect Generative AI is changing how people access and process information. For many, it's replacing the need to sift through sources, compare viewpoints and wrestle with ambiguity. Instead, AI delivers clear, polished answers within seconds. While those results may or may not be accurate, they are undeniably efficient. This has already led to big changes in how we work and think. But this convenience may come at a cost. When people rely on AI to complete tasks and think for them, they may be weakening their ability to think critically, solve complex problems and engage deeply with information. Although research on this point is limited, passively consuming AI-generated content may discourage intellectual curiosity, reduce attention spans and create a dependency that limits long-term cognitive development. To better understand this risk, consider the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is the phenomenon in which people who are the least knowledgeable and competent tend to be the most confident in their abilities, because they don't know what they don't know. In contrast, more competent people tend to be less confident. This is often because they can recognise the complexities they have yet to master. This framework can be applied to generative AI use. Some users may rely heavily on tools such as ChatGPT to replace their cognitive effort, while others use it to enhance their capabilities. In the former case, they may mistakenly believe they understand a topic because they can repeat AI-generated content. In this way, AI can artificially inflate one's perceived intelligence while actually reducing cognitive effort. This creates a divide in how people use AI. Some remain stuck on the 'peak of Mount Stupid,' using AI as a substitute for creativity and thinking. Others use it to enhance their existing cognitive capabilities. In other words, what matters isn't whether a person uses generative AI, but how. If used uncritically, ChatGPT can lead to intellectual complacency. Users may accept its output without questioning assumptions, seeking alternative viewpoints or conducting deeper analysis. But when used as an aid, it can become a powerful tool for stimulating curiosity, generating ideas, clarifying complex topics and provoking intellectual dialogue. The difference between ChatGPT making us stupid or enhancing our capabilities rests in how we use it. Generative AI should be used to augment human intelligence, not replace it. That means using ChatGPT to support inquiry, not to shortcut it. It means treating AI responses as the beginning of thought, not the end. AI, thinking and the future of work The mass adoption of generative AI, led by the explosive rise of ChatGPT – it reached 100 million users within two months of its release – has, in my view, left internet users at a crossroads. One path leads to intellectual decline: a world where we let AI do the thinking for us. The other offers an opportunity: to expand our brainpower by working in tandem with AI, leveraging its power to enhance our own. It's often said that AI won't take your job, but someone using AI will. But it seems clear to me that people who use AI to replace their own cognitive abilities will be stuck at the peak of Mount Stupid. These AI users will be the easiest to replace. It's those who take the augmented approach to AI use who will reach the path of enlightenment, working together with AI to produce results that neither is capable of producing alone. This is where the future of work will eventually go. This essay started with the question of whether ChatGPT will make us stupid, but I'd like to end with a different question: How will we use ChatGPT to make us smarter? The answers to both questions depend not on the tool but on users. (The Conversation)
Hindustan Times
7 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Mocked in job interview, Indian woman's clapback after joining Google goes viral
An Indian woman's post gained widespread support after she shared a past interview experience where she was mocked by a startup interviewer who claimed she would never make it to tech giants like Google or Meta. The post, by a user named Arpita, narrated her interview experience and revealed her eventual success in a mic-drop moment. Proving the interviewer wrong, the user revealed that she now works at Google. (Pexel) 'Was grilled by a mid-level startup interviewer in a system design round, he made me design infra, estimate CPU costs, basically everything except physically build the data centre,' she wrote. However, the grilling soon turned condescending when she struggled to answer. As she faltered, the interviewer smirked and said, 'This is why people like you won't make it to big companies like Google, Meta.' Proving the interviewer wrong, the user revealed that she now works at Google. Her X bio also claims that she worked for brands like Myntra and Microsoft in the past. 'Not bragging—just wondering why some folks gatekeep based on their own insecurities," she concluded. The post quickly struck a chord with many online. "Great story. Success is the best revenge. Keep going," remarked one user. Another added, "Absolutely weird. When I take interviews, I usually try to do them in a way that shows how much I can learn from the other person." A third slammed the bad attitudes of several interviewers. "Today, most interviewers see attitude and eagerness to learn as you can not judge a person on the whole thing in those 10-15 minutes," they wrote. "I think in later stages you will get the chance to interview that interviewer in future, that's how the world works," joked a fourth user.
