Google search results are personalized (based on your search history) and in general this is useful. However, as Google learns what I like it then provides me customized results and sometimes I am interested in how thing rank in the "regular" search. The regular search is becoming less and less relavant as so many results are personalized still I find it interesting. To view unpersonalized Google search results add &pws=0 to the end of the query url.
For Example to search for me, John Hunter, the first link gives your personal results and the second gives the "regular results":
http://www.google.com/search?q=john+hunter
http://www.google.com/search?q=john+hunter&pws=0
For engineering blog:
http://www.google.com/search?q=engineering+blog
http://www.google.com/search?q=engineering+blog&pws=0
For country manufacturing data
http://www.google.com/search?q=country+manufacturing+data
http://www.google.com/search?q=country+manufacturing+data&pws=0
Related: Should Google Use Factors Other Than User Value When Providing Search Results?
Monday, January 28, 2008
Sunday, January 27, 2008
The Life Cycle of a Blog Post
The Life Cycle of a Blog Post, From Servers to Spiders to Suits — to You
Somewhat interesting post. I find their crazy too small to see graphic that you are suppose to navigate with the mouse and holding the button down another example of gratuitous flash. Why do so many people seem to insist on fancy less usable interfaces over simple easy to use ones?
Somewhat interesting post. I find their crazy too small to see graphic that you are suppose to navigate with the mouse and holding the button down another example of gratuitous flash. Why do so many people seem to insist on fancy less usable interfaces over simple easy to use ones?
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Evolution - Fact or Question
Is the Theory of Evolution Really a Matter of Faith?
No, of course it isn't. As the authors state:
Exactly right. Now people can doubt anything they want. But certain things beyond are reasonable doubt. People can try to create controversy where really there is none among those that understand an issue in the hopes of confusing the general public. Thinking evolution is questionable is like thinking that the basic ideas of geology are questionable.
There was a time when people doubted the earth was billions of years old. That the continents drifted apart. That diamonds were created far under the earth under great pressure and heat - out of simple carbon. That the explanation for the mountains, valleys, rocks, gems, earthquakes, volcanos and on and on were essentially as we understand geology today. Today there is no serious question about the basic concepts.
Someday, my guess is before 2070 the same will be true of evolution (I would hope before 2030 - but people can avoid seeing the truth longer than I would optimistically think). I have no doubt that this will come about. By what date I have nothing more than a wild guess. When that date finally arrives those that tried to claim the was some controversy will look pretty silly - given all the evidence we have today.
Most all those questioning geology realized the overwhelming evidence required adjusting their beliefs far before the overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution we have today. Science is about adjusting your world view as new evidence provides a much more valid understanding of an area of study.
Related: Understanding Evolution is Fundamental to Scientific Thinking - Understanding the Evolution of Human Beings by Country - Understanding Evolution (from Berkeley) - Teaching Evolution and the Nature of Science - United States The National Academy of Science's Science, Evolution, and Creationism
No, of course it isn't. As the authors state:
As a natural phenomenon based on scientific evidence, evolution is not a matter of belief or faith, any more than gravity or genetics, and to ask whether someone believes in it is a nonsensical question, much like asking if someone believes in subatomic particles.
Exactly right. Now people can doubt anything they want. But certain things beyond are reasonable doubt. People can try to create controversy where really there is none among those that understand an issue in the hopes of confusing the general public. Thinking evolution is questionable is like thinking that the basic ideas of geology are questionable.
There was a time when people doubted the earth was billions of years old. That the continents drifted apart. That diamonds were created far under the earth under great pressure and heat - out of simple carbon. That the explanation for the mountains, valleys, rocks, gems, earthquakes, volcanos and on and on were essentially as we understand geology today. Today there is no serious question about the basic concepts.
Someday, my guess is before 2070 the same will be true of evolution (I would hope before 2030 - but people can avoid seeing the truth longer than I would optimistically think). I have no doubt that this will come about. By what date I have nothing more than a wild guess. When that date finally arrives those that tried to claim the was some controversy will look pretty silly - given all the evidence we have today.
Most all those questioning geology realized the overwhelming evidence required adjusting their beliefs far before the overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution we have today. Science is about adjusting your world view as new evidence provides a much more valid understanding of an area of study.
Related: Understanding Evolution is Fundamental to Scientific Thinking - Understanding the Evolution of Human Beings by Country - Understanding Evolution (from Berkeley) - Teaching Evolution and the Nature of Science - United States The National Academy of Science's Science, Evolution, and Creationism
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Don't Lock Your Content Inside a Proprietary System
Has your Facebook account been “erased” by Facebook?
What to do? Just don't join networks where the primary value is locked up inside them. If you don't control most of your content don't join (and if the value is locked up inside their system don't bother, or at least don't invest much time at all so little is lost in the event of a problem).
Hoping companies will care and be competent enough to manage what you invest in creating just doesn't seem like a worthwhile risk to take to me. They will have all sorts of issues to deal with and either out of plain bad management or because they decided it is easier and cheaper to destroy (deleting it, breaking support for code you relied on...) what you have created they are very likely to not value your investment. Most likely, only if their belief of what is in their interests happens to align with what is in your interests will you be in someone decent shape (even then you are susceptible to them managing poorly).
For social networks I can see they might add value by providing useful tools to improve connections (but if they can't figure out a way to be open and interact easily with mainly internet based content don't waste your time with their old proprietary thinking model). I just don't see much need to participate in an enterprise where I would have to invest my time and energy and content and hope that the company decides not to be evil for the rest of the time I want to deal with them.
Keep most of your content under your control. For example even if your content is in Blogger, the ability to backup (and move) your blogger blog essentially leaves the content in your control. Then if Google decides to be evil you just take you backup and post it elsewhere.
ever since Facebook blocked my account for a little less than a day people have been calling me with some real sob stories about how their accounts got turned off by Facebook and that they have no recourse.
What to do? Just don't join networks where the primary value is locked up inside them. If you don't control most of your content don't join (and if the value is locked up inside their system don't bother, or at least don't invest much time at all so little is lost in the event of a problem).
Hoping companies will care and be competent enough to manage what you invest in creating just doesn't seem like a worthwhile risk to take to me. They will have all sorts of issues to deal with and either out of plain bad management or because they decided it is easier and cheaper to destroy (deleting it, breaking support for code you relied on...) what you have created they are very likely to not value your investment. Most likely, only if their belief of what is in their interests happens to align with what is in your interests will you be in someone decent shape (even then you are susceptible to them managing poorly).
For social networks I can see they might add value by providing useful tools to improve connections (but if they can't figure out a way to be open and interact easily with mainly internet based content don't waste your time with their old proprietary thinking model). I just don't see much need to participate in an enterprise where I would have to invest my time and energy and content and hope that the company decides not to be evil for the rest of the time I want to deal with them.
Keep most of your content under your control. For example even if your content is in Blogger, the ability to backup (and move) your blogger blog essentially leaves the content in your control. Then if Google decides to be evil you just take you backup and post it elsewhere.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Urban Exploring: Detroit
It will rise from the ashes
Detroit, with its thousands of abandoned structures, is something of a mecca for kids and adults who still do this sort of thing. There's a whole community of them here, and people come from all over the country to "explore" the city's ruins.
...
This city's school district is so impoverished that students are not allowed to take their textbooks home to do homework, and many of its administrators are so corrupt that every few months the newspapers have a field day with their scandals, sweetheart-deals, and expensive trips made at the expense of a population of children who can no longer rely on a public education to help lift them from the cycle of violence and poverty that has made Detroit the most dangerous city in America. To walk through this ruin, more than any other, I think, is to obliquely experience the real tragedy of this city; not some sentimental tragedy of brick and plaster, but one of people
...
This city's school district is so impoverished that students are not allowed to take their textbooks home to do homework, and many of its administrators are so corrupt that every few months the newspapers have a field day with their scandals, sweetheart-deals, and expensive trips made at the expense of a population of children who can no longer rely on a public education to help lift them from the cycle of violence and poverty that has made Detroit the most dangerous city in America. To walk through this ruin, more than any other, I think, is to obliquely experience the real tragedy of this city; not some sentimental tragedy of brick and plaster, but one of people
More photos of the Detroit Public Schools Book Depository
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Too Much Stuff
Guess what income level it takes to put you in the top 1% of earners today? Answer below. Most people that will read this are tremendously rich (compared to all others alive today, or just the very rich form just a few generations ago). Check for yourself: How Rich are You - enter your income and see what your world rank is.
Yet for many having fewer toys than those around them makes them feel poor. Their problem is not too few things (deprivation versus abundance). Affluenza is a good view of the problem caused when people don't understand they already have plenty of stuff and keep looking for more.
How about giving a helping hand to those less well off through Kiva (micro credit loans to entrepreneurs). Curious Cat readers that have already made loans to help others. If you would like to be listed, add a comment with your Kiva page and we add a link to it on that page.
$50,000
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Do Red Light Cameras Make for Safer Intersections?
Comment on Red-Light Cameras Increase Accidents: 5 Studies That Prove It:
Ok, so lets say that the studies are conclusive. What actions do you suggest? If safety is important i would guess reducing accidents is important. Does that mean actions you suggest such actions as removing red light cameras and spending money to re-engineer dangerous intersections? If so what money should be used to re-engineer dangerous intersections? Gas tax funding? Or is just eliminating red light cameras what you suggest? Any suggestions on reducing the more than 40,000 people killed every year in the USA in traffic accidents? I would guess (without any evidence) red light cameras cannot account for a significant number of those deaths.
Related: D.C. Red-Light Cameras Fail to Curb Accidents - Leading Causes of Death
Ok, so lets say that the studies are conclusive. What actions do you suggest? If safety is important i would guess reducing accidents is important. Does that mean actions you suggest such actions as removing red light cameras and spending money to re-engineer dangerous intersections? If so what money should be used to re-engineer dangerous intersections? Gas tax funding? Or is just eliminating red light cameras what you suggest? Any suggestions on reducing the more than 40,000 people killed every year in the USA in traffic accidents? I would guess (without any evidence) red light cameras cannot account for a significant number of those deaths.
Related: D.C. Red-Light Cameras Fail to Curb Accidents - Leading Causes of Death
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Using Your Digital Camera
9 Digital Camera Settings for Every Photographer to Discover
Related: Canon Power Shot A700 - Curious Cat Travel Photos - Travel photo directory
Aperture and Shutter Priority Mode - Where to find it: Usually on the dial on top of your digital camera.
...
Any photograph has both an aperture and a shutter speed. The aperture regulates how wide the lens opening is, while the shutter speed regulates how long the shutter was left open. These two items, in tandem, regulate the exposure of a photograph.
In an automatic mode, the digital camera chooses its own combination of aperture and shutter speed to create a good exposure - you don’t have to do any of the thinking. But sometimes, you want more control over your digital camera, and that’s when shutter and aperture priority come into play.
...
Aperture priority mode allows you control over the depth of field of an image. The more open the lens is, the more shallow the depth of field is.
...
Any photograph has both an aperture and a shutter speed. The aperture regulates how wide the lens opening is, while the shutter speed regulates how long the shutter was left open. These two items, in tandem, regulate the exposure of a photograph.
In an automatic mode, the digital camera chooses its own combination of aperture and shutter speed to create a good exposure - you don’t have to do any of the thinking. But sometimes, you want more control over your digital camera, and that’s when shutter and aperture priority come into play.
...
Aperture priority mode allows you control over the depth of field of an image. The more open the lens is, the more shallow the depth of field is.
Related: Canon Power Shot A700 - Curious Cat Travel Photos - Travel photo directory
Monday, January 07, 2008
Wordpress Admin Page Not Found
Wordpress Admin Page Not Found
Good tip. If, after you upgrade Wordpress you get a 404 page not found error when trying to access the admin section check that the directory permissions are set to 755 for /wp-admin/
On a hunch, I changed the directory permissions (for wp-admin) from 775 to 755, and voila, I now had access to my blog’s admin pages.
Good tip. If, after you upgrade Wordpress you get a 404 page not found error when trying to access the admin section check that the directory permissions are set to 755 for /wp-admin/
Saturday, December 29, 2007
How to Install Anything in Ubuntu!
How to Install Anything in Ubuntu! - nice complete guide for folks new to Ubuntu.
Related: Why Desktop Linux Will Take off - Google Tech Webcasts #3
Related: Why Desktop Linux Will Take off - Google Tech Webcasts #3
Friday, December 28, 2007
Fun Rant on Arguments
Enjoy this long fun rant on Things My Girlfriend and I Have Argued About
I tend to get quite a few men writing to me saying, 'Think your girlfriend's a nightmare, well mine's worse.' Now, this always surprises me. First of all, I wasn't aware that I was giving the impression that Margret is something of a trial to live with. I'm here merely stating the facts, without bias or embellishment: a simple camera pointed at the scene, recording it with complete neutrality. I am, frankly, shocked and disturbed that anyone might think I'm here to make the case that my girlfriend is, say, as mad as an eel.
...
Margret is sitting at this computer (which is in the attic room, incidentally) typing something. I'm flopped in a chair close by with a paper and pad, scribbling away at a bit of work.
I pause and say to her, 'Tortoise and turtle is the same word in German, isn't it?'
She stops typing, reaches over, pulls off one of my Birkenstock shoes, throws it down through trapdoor (I hear it thud below, then flip-flop down the stairs) and returns to her typing. All in a single, silent movement.
Your guess is as good as mine, frankly.
...
Margret is sitting at this computer (which is in the attic room, incidentally) typing something. I'm flopped in a chair close by with a paper and pad, scribbling away at a bit of work.
I pause and say to her, 'Tortoise and turtle is the same word in German, isn't it?'
She stops typing, reaches over, pulls off one of my Birkenstock shoes, throws it down through trapdoor (I hear it thud below, then flip-flop down the stairs) and returns to her typing. All in a single, silent movement.
Your guess is as good as mine, frankly.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Monday, December 24, 2007
Gmail Security Tip
The problem has supposedly been fixed but here is what happened. User logs into Gmail. User visits site with infection code. Site injects a filter into Gmail to have the users email matching the filter to be forwarded to any email they like.
Google’s GMail security failure leaves my business sabotaged
If you see any filters you don't want - delete them. You also might want to forward any evidence of illegal action to the authorities. Unfortunately I am not convinced they invest enough in policing internet crimes. But hopefully they can be encouraged to actually prosecute such crime.
Google’s GMail security failure leaves my business sabotaged
If you use GMail, it’s absolutely vital that you check your account settings now.
Here's what to do:
When logged into GMail, click on the 'settings' tab in the upper right of the screen. Then check both the 'Filters' and the 'Forwarding and POP' sections.
Here's what to do:
When logged into GMail, click on the 'settings' tab in the upper right of the screen. Then check both the 'Filters' and the 'Forwarding and POP' sections.
If you see any filters you don't want - delete them. You also might want to forward any evidence of illegal action to the authorities. Unfortunately I am not convinced they invest enough in policing internet crimes. But hopefully they can be encouraged to actually prosecute such crime.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Promises and more movies
I watched Promises yesterday. It was a very good documentary on Israeli and Palestinian children. It was nominated for an Academy Award in 2002.
Another good, little known movie is Whale Rider. I really liked this movie and just figured I would mention it too. And while I am at it here are some fun movies: 5th Element, Modern Times (Charlie Chaplan), What About Bob?, Blade Runner, Planes, Trains and Automobiles and Monsters, Inc..
Another good, little known movie is Whale Rider. I really liked this movie and just figured I would mention it too. And while I am at it here are some fun movies: 5th Element, Modern Times (Charlie Chaplan), What About Bob?, Blade Runner, Planes, Trains and Automobiles and Monsters, Inc..
Friday, December 14, 2007
What is Wrong with Copyright Taking Public Good for Private Special Interests
Why Has Copyright Expanded? Analysis and Critique by Neil Netanal:
This is another good look at the failure of public policy that is the current ever increasing special interest favors at the expense of society.
Related: Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation - The Differences Between Culture and Code - Lessig Video on Information Revolution - Innovation and Creative Commons - DMCA Debacle
Numerous commentators have decried the growth of copyright holder rights in recent decades. Copyright's expansion is widely said to be inimical to copyright's core goals and economic rational. If so, why has that expansion occurred? Without question, there are multiple causes. This essay surveys and critiques a number of them, beginning with the copyright industries' raw political muscle and moving to the rhetorical and theoretical frameworks for expansion.
...
the public interest – as reflected in some 300 years of copyright precedent – is for a narrowly tailored incentive for authors to contribute to the store of knowledge and enrich the public domain. Copyright is meant to spur creativity and expressive diversity. When it has the opposite effect – when authors cannot freely build upon their predecessors’ works in creating new expression and when copyright serves as a tool for entrenching media conglomerates – something has gone awry.
...
the public interest – as reflected in some 300 years of copyright precedent – is for a narrowly tailored incentive for authors to contribute to the store of knowledge and enrich the public domain. Copyright is meant to spur creativity and expressive diversity. When it has the opposite effect – when authors cannot freely build upon their predecessors’ works in creating new expression and when copyright serves as a tool for entrenching media conglomerates – something has gone awry.
This is another good look at the failure of public policy that is the current ever increasing special interest favors at the expense of society.
Related: Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation - The Differences Between Culture and Code - Lessig Video on Information Revolution - Innovation and Creative Commons - DMCA Debacle
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Virtual Personal Assistants
Get Friday
Does anyone have experience with virtual personal assistants? Any recommendations or warnings?
Does anyone have experience with virtual personal assistants? Any recommendations or warnings?
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Amazing Japanese Nursery Train
ever been on a train this nice?
believe it or not, the photo above is of a train interior in japan.
with the results looking nicer than most nurseries, the japanese have taken the idea of ‘child-friendly public transport’ to the next level with these 2 beauties, both designed by eiji mitooka. he was the artistic force behind ‘omoden’ (toy train) and ‘ichigo ec’ (strawberry train), a couple of regional trains which travel on a daily basis on the 14.3km kishigawa line in japan. the japanase are intent on making train travel a more comfortable experience for everyone, women and children especially, and the results are incredible.
both trains contain hundreds of toys, tv screens showing cartoons, immaculately clean wooden flooring and cots for younger children.
with the results looking nicer than most nurseries, the japanese have taken the idea of ‘child-friendly public transport’ to the next level with these 2 beauties, both designed by eiji mitooka. he was the artistic force behind ‘omoden’ (toy train) and ‘ichigo ec’ (strawberry train), a couple of regional trains which travel on a daily basis on the 14.3km kishigawa line in japan. the japanase are intent on making train travel a more comfortable experience for everyone, women and children especially, and the results are incredible.
both trains contain hundreds of toys, tv screens showing cartoons, immaculately clean wooden flooring and cots for younger children.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Drew Carey Defends Poker
Drew Carey Defends Poker
How can they justify a SWAT style raid for a poker game at a VFW Hall? It is well known the excessive use of swat style raids has lead to many deaths of innocent people. Evidence of systemic failure of police with SWAT raids.
Maybe Dallas wouldn't be ranked as the 34th most dangerous city in America if Dallas police weren't devoting precious resources to raiding friendly poker games played by veterans. In his latest video for Reason.tv, Drew Carey examines a paramilitary-style raid on a poker game at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 1837 in Dallas, which has now been forced to close its doors.
"Poker is about as American as baseball and apple pie," Carey says in theReason.tv video. "It was born here in America. Mark Twain loved it. He's a great American. Until recently, Supreme Court justices had a monthly game. They're great Americans. You'd think playing poker in a VFW hall would be about as American as anything you could do."
"Poker is about as American as baseball and apple pie," Carey says in theReason.tv video. "It was born here in America. Mark Twain loved it. He's a great American. Until recently, Supreme Court justices had a monthly game. They're great Americans. You'd think playing poker in a VFW hall would be about as American as anything you could do."
How can they justify a SWAT style raid for a poker game at a VFW Hall? It is well known the excessive use of swat style raids has lead to many deaths of innocent people. Evidence of systemic failure of police with SWAT raids.
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Matt Mullenweg, Wordpress Podcast
An interesting interview (podcast) with Matt Mullenweg, Wordpress Founding Developer. Wordpress is a great tool. This blog is still on blogger but my other 3 blogs use Wordpress:
Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog
Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog
Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog
Related: posts on software development - some excellent freeware
Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog
Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog
Curious Cat Investing and Economics Blog
Related: posts on software development - some excellent freeware
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Are Paid Links 100% Untrustworthy?
In reply to Dave
> from reading your post you appear to be suggesting that Google
> allow pages to buy their way up the organic SERPs?
Not really. Unless you count as "buying their way up" something like hiring Scoble to write for you. Then people link to his stuff and the stuff he writes about and as part of that your content rises.
What I think is that it is not the most effective model to treat certain paid for content as completely untrustworthy. It seems to me the proper model to factor in the bias.
When Fox has news stories about their TV shows my personal view is that is a significant indication of bias their "news" (and of course, as I think any logical person would do it brings into question the merit of any other "news" presented). But I don't think they are 100% untrustworthy. When Some prestigious academic is funded by a drug company I believe they are biased but I do not believe the results are 100% untrustworthy.
If Matt writes about some neat new Google product I know there are biases - even if the only bias is he is much more likely to hear about a cool Google product than one from some other company because he works for them. But I figure if he says he likes some new Google that is worth factoring into my decision whether to look at it. And in fact I give him something like 97% credibility on doing so. If he thinks some new Google offering is junk I don't think he will say it is great. I just don't, I could be wrong but I am confident of that. Would the Fox site links to some new TV show that is horrible? Yes I do believe it would.
If some other blogger I trust highly writes on say Ruby on Rails and then says they are sponsored by the annual Ruby on Rails conference which they attended the last 2 years and it is great and they highly recommend it I find that valuable. And yes I do believe the best search result would be enhanced by giving value to this recommendation of this blogger even though it is likely they will provide more links to the conference due to the conference than they would have if they did not receive pay to do so. This certainly could be seen as buying your way up the search results.
I don't automatically ignore all advice where the author has some personal financial incentive or stake. That is one factor, but it is not a binary operation (0% trustworthy or 100% trustworthy). It seems to me to select the best search results you would need to apply the same logic. Granted I have no real idea how to do that. But I do have the opinion Google can figure out good ways to do that. And I think that would be the correct strategy.
I also think this is an interesting area to think about. How to find the best results for a search. How to reward behavior Google would like (say good title text) and how to punish behavior Google doesn't. But really those are just methods to the true aim which is the best search results. Google does it pretty well I think but I think they can do much much better. Which I think is pretty much what the people working at Google think. Users of the search engine don't care what the title text is (basically) they want the best pages for them. They don't care if they comply to Google's recommendations. It does make it easier for Google to find the best results if the title text is relevant but that is an issue for Google. So Google tries to help sites make it easier for Google to return results by providing guidelines - that is very sensible. And in the same way I have no problem with Google having guidelines on certain types of paid links.
I happen to think on this matter - that certain paid links are to be 100% ignored is not the correct strategy (to create the best search results). But I may certainly be wrong, maybe it is. I think the best strategy would be to rank the content and links on other factors. The pay is not the problem. Some bad practice that are encouraged by pay are the problem. So weigh those. If it is links to low quality sites then factor in any link to "low quality" sites. If it is unrelated links in a footer across a whole site, factor that in. If link keywords are the problem then attach that - whether they are paid for and how they are paid for does not invalidate them (as a source of useful data to rank search results), in my opinion.
Certain authors are much more swayed by payment. That again is a factor as a human we consider. If a great Ruby on Rails blog promotes certain gambling, mesothelioma and mortgage loans with no insight I lose respect for their opinions. Wether they were paid or not (but obviously pay is a likely reason for such writing. On the other hand, if they include a few off topic posts that are sensible I have not problem accepting that as more input to consider (probably I give a bit less weight than I would to posts on Ruby on Rails) but I still value it.
I don't have any problem with Google campaigning against certain paid links (I believe Matt has said several times the current campaign is against specific types of paid links other links that are more indirect [and which as a matter of course most often involve much more money] are not being campaigned against. I just find it interesting to examine the assumptions behind the current strategy.
Related: Google's Search Results - Should Factors Other Than User Value be Used - Google's Displayed PageRank - Improvement Ideas for Google (2006) - Web Search Improvements (2005) - posts on Google management practices
> from reading your post you appear to be suggesting that Google
> allow pages to buy their way up the organic SERPs?
Not really. Unless you count as "buying their way up" something like hiring Scoble to write for you. Then people link to his stuff and the stuff he writes about and as part of that your content rises.
What I think is that it is not the most effective model to treat certain paid for content as completely untrustworthy. It seems to me the proper model to factor in the bias.
When Fox has news stories about their TV shows my personal view is that is a significant indication of bias their "news" (and of course, as I think any logical person would do it brings into question the merit of any other "news" presented). But I don't think they are 100% untrustworthy. When Some prestigious academic is funded by a drug company I believe they are biased but I do not believe the results are 100% untrustworthy.
If Matt writes about some neat new Google product I know there are biases - even if the only bias is he is much more likely to hear about a cool Google product than one from some other company because he works for them. But I figure if he says he likes some new Google that is worth factoring into my decision whether to look at it. And in fact I give him something like 97% credibility on doing so. If he thinks some new Google offering is junk I don't think he will say it is great. I just don't, I could be wrong but I am confident of that. Would the Fox site links to some new TV show that is horrible? Yes I do believe it would.
If some other blogger I trust highly writes on say Ruby on Rails and then says they are sponsored by the annual Ruby on Rails conference which they attended the last 2 years and it is great and they highly recommend it I find that valuable. And yes I do believe the best search result would be enhanced by giving value to this recommendation of this blogger even though it is likely they will provide more links to the conference due to the conference than they would have if they did not receive pay to do so. This certainly could be seen as buying your way up the search results.
I don't automatically ignore all advice where the author has some personal financial incentive or stake. That is one factor, but it is not a binary operation (0% trustworthy or 100% trustworthy). It seems to me to select the best search results you would need to apply the same logic. Granted I have no real idea how to do that. But I do have the opinion Google can figure out good ways to do that. And I think that would be the correct strategy.
I also think this is an interesting area to think about. How to find the best results for a search. How to reward behavior Google would like (say good title text) and how to punish behavior Google doesn't. But really those are just methods to the true aim which is the best search results. Google does it pretty well I think but I think they can do much much better. Which I think is pretty much what the people working at Google think. Users of the search engine don't care what the title text is (basically) they want the best pages for them. They don't care if they comply to Google's recommendations. It does make it easier for Google to find the best results if the title text is relevant but that is an issue for Google. So Google tries to help sites make it easier for Google to return results by providing guidelines - that is very sensible. And in the same way I have no problem with Google having guidelines on certain types of paid links.
I happen to think on this matter - that certain paid links are to be 100% ignored is not the correct strategy (to create the best search results). But I may certainly be wrong, maybe it is. I think the best strategy would be to rank the content and links on other factors. The pay is not the problem. Some bad practice that are encouraged by pay are the problem. So weigh those. If it is links to low quality sites then factor in any link to "low quality" sites. If it is unrelated links in a footer across a whole site, factor that in. If link keywords are the problem then attach that - whether they are paid for and how they are paid for does not invalidate them (as a source of useful data to rank search results), in my opinion.
Certain authors are much more swayed by payment. That again is a factor as a human we consider. If a great Ruby on Rails blog promotes certain gambling, mesothelioma and mortgage loans with no insight I lose respect for their opinions. Wether they were paid or not (but obviously pay is a likely reason for such writing. On the other hand, if they include a few off topic posts that are sensible I have not problem accepting that as more input to consider (probably I give a bit less weight than I would to posts on Ruby on Rails) but I still value it.
I don't have any problem with Google campaigning against certain paid links (I believe Matt has said several times the current campaign is against specific types of paid links other links that are more indirect [and which as a matter of course most often involve much more money] are not being campaigned against. I just find it interesting to examine the assumptions behind the current strategy.
Related: Google's Search Results - Should Factors Other Than User Value be Used - Google's Displayed PageRank - Improvement Ideas for Google (2006) - Web Search Improvements (2005) - posts on Google management practices
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)