161–170 of 192 posts
most of my google searches include a wikipedia result on the first page. I would estimate this could reduce Google's web search revenue by upwards of 40% worldwide.
Google doesn't make that much money on research quieries. It's mostly your other queries are what enables them to sell ads.
The biggest problem is the lack of data about what people are searching. It's a catch-22 that's very hard to break in the face of Google's search dominance and ubiquity. By Google being the best, it only becomes better, and introduces a huge barrier to entry to competitors. It used to be possible to know what people were searching for to end up in a given Wikipedia article, but the process is now only asynchronous (a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This may or may not be what you're looking for, but my freelance site just can't hit the front page in my industry when dozens of highly funded agencies can dominate it. I've published a 50k word industry-specific book on my site, have SEO'd as much as possible and have an older domain than those better funded. Won't link to it here, but it seems to be a real issue to me. If a search engine let you differentiate and…
btw, your site's redirect to the HTTPS version doesn't seem to work correctly in Firefox, Safari, or IE. After reading your comment, I was curious to learn more. When I typed in just your domain name plus CMD+ENTER (which adds "www." and ".com" to the address bar text in Firefox), I got a 404 page, not the 301 redirect to the HTTPS site. When I add " http://" , the redirect seems to work.
I'd not heard of the CMD+ENTER method before, so thanks for the heads up. Still not entirely sure what Firefox is submitting in that case. Will test.
I wasn't referring to this site in the parent comment, but to my freelance site. I'll put that site in my profile for 24 hours just in case anyone wants to take a look.
EDIT: Fixed, as noted in reply to nl's comments. A recent change led to a redirect line being mistakenly commented out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. I'll start off with the following email from Liam Wyatt: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-Febru... The grant application you are looking at was only revealed due to a MASSIVE amount of controversy and pressure within the Wikimedia Foundation. The community representative (James Heilman) on the board was let go the other day, in part because of concerns around this grant. You might want to…
It may be of little importance vs your excellent references and what they show but... does anyone else notice how she worded that message is just... so... weird? The wording comes off like a combination of academia, PR, and email scams to me. Just straight BS that no normal, caring person in a mission-oriented organization should ever say. I mean, there's certainly styles I'm unfamiliar with. I'm always open to new e…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
btw, your site's redirect to the HTTPS version doesn't seem to work correctly in Firefox, Safari, or IE. After reading your comment, I was curious to learn more. When I typed in just your domain name plus CMD+ENTER (which adds "www." and ".com" to the address bar text in Firefox), I got a 404 page, not the 301 redirect to the HTTPS site. When I add " http://" , the redirect seems to work.
This. I don't work in this area, but I'd say that 99% of the time I hear someone complaining about how Google is favoring sites that pay for advertising over them I find that they are making these incredibly basic errors. For me, http://www.linguaquote.com/ gives a 404. It's only when I go to https://www.linguaquote.com/ that it works.
So I'm afraid it's not quite as simple as you make out in this case.
In other news, I've just pinpointed the missing line in the recently changed nginx config for Linguaquote; the http://www block had it's redirect commented out. Still, for this site in particular Google Webmaster tools is set up for the https version where no errors have been reported and SSL Labs gave an A+ for the stapling, PFS, heartbleed etc. etc. efforts I went to. I don't think this redirect was having an adverse effect on ranking, but I don't expect this site to hit the front page just yet - much more content to add before aiming for that.
The biggest problem is the lack of data about what people are searching. It's a catch-22 that's very hard to break in the face of Google's search dominance and ubiquity. By Google being the best, it only becomes better, and introduces a huge barrier to entry to competitors. It used to be possible to know what people were searching for to end up in a given Wikipedia article, but the process is now only asynchronous (a…
Keyword Planner tool tells you what people search for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It works for me. Care to show me a screenshot?
The host (assuming the same host) is responding with a different website when accessed via IPv4 vs IPv6. $ curl -4s http://kairos.xyz/ | grep title Kairos $ curl -6s http://kairos.xyz/ | grep title Welcome to nginx on Debian! $ host kairos.xyz kairos.xyz has address 107.161.29.121 kairos.xyz has IPv6 address 2604:180:0:a54::24d9
listen 80;
listen [::]:80;
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be of little importance vs your excellent references and what they show but... does anyone else notice how she worded that message is just... so... weird? The wording comes off like a combination of academia, PR, and email scams to me. Just straight BS that no normal, caring person in a mission-oriented organization should ever say. I mean, there's certainly styles I'm unfamiliar with. I'm always open to new e…
Yeah, it's super weird. I'm usually pretty understanding of corporate communication, especially when it's going to be public, but those paragraphs are just bizarrely phrased. "Ideation," "retrospecting", "beings," "universe," frequent references to a "rocket." It reads like one of those crazy-people websites from the 90s with a dozen different fonts.
I've been critical of her "rocket" imagery, but I like to think I'm understanding about the odd use of English in the rest of her comments. Especially as I'm a monolinguist, heavens only knows how I would sound if I tried to learn and speak Russian amongst Russians...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most non-profits, especially the ones that are always asking, usually have a lot of funds. Before I give, I go to guidestar, hit free preview(they try to trick you into a paying membership), download last few years of 1040's, and see if everything looks copacetic. I look at who is making the most money. Their is usually one person making a very good living. California non-profits are much easier to scrutinize than De…
They are required to give you the 990 form if you email them usually. In anycase, https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Financial_reports And the internet archive is a lot more deserving.