71–80 of 118 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm thrilled to report that uBlock Origin completely strips out this spam on the search results page. I was worried that it might take some time to filter out this noise from the search results page, but apparently not!
So uBlock is actually blocking a site's own content? I've heard a lot about false positives but this takes the price.
It is scary how much power and influence Google now have in setting the agenda for public discourse. When this opens up to other "prominent figures and organizations", it will be at Google's discretion who is worthy of the public's attention and which issues and areas will get this treatment. This seems a step beyond simply organising the world’s information. Even if it's with the best intentions, the fact is that th…
It is scary how much power and influence Google now have in setting the agenda for public discourse. When this opens up to other "prominent figures and organizations", it will be at Google's discretion who is worthy of the public's attention and which issues and areas will get this treatment. This seems a step beyond simply organising the world’s information. Even if it's with the best intentions, the fact is that th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or it could be a desire to provide maximally relevant search results. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, Dr. Freud. Not-a-disclaimer: I'm spending the year at Google (as a visiting scientist; I don't own stock and have no financial interest in its success). You might be surprised by how strong the desire is to do the right thing by users and make it easy for them to find what they're looking for. There's not always a…
"Gut gemeint ist das Gegenteil von gut!" German saying! Even with the right motive, you can make - in Googles case: systematic - wrong decisions.
This seems like a bad idea in that it allows the powerful to completely control the messages that are affiliated with them. Suppose celebrity x does wrong to a regular citizen, and they have Google posts at their disposal while Jane Smith does not. On the other hand, this seems like something Rick Santorum might have been grateful for.
I can imagine the popular, rich and powerful to love it. Imagine avoiding all the abuse, threats, snide remarks, witty rebuttals, imaginative memes and uncomfortable truths that Twitter gives them as a platform. People want something more sanitized as a platform. It's quite an interesting development.
It is scary how much power and influence Google now have in setting the agenda for public discourse. When this opens up to other "prominent figures and organizations", it will be at Google's discretion who is worthy of the public's attention and which issues and areas will get this treatment. This seems a step beyond simply organising the world’s information. Even if it's with the best intentions, the fact is that th…
http://www.fec.gov/data/Form2Filer.do?format=html
On another note, I wonder if this has anything to do with Medium who has been positioning itself in Washington and C-suites as the "default place for people to go when they have ideas of consequence."
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/how-medium-is-breaking...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. I'd argue further that Twitter has done close to nothing to make their search a useful feature in the first place, which is why people aren't searching Twitter with "Donald Trump". If I was Twitter, this would be very worrying. All they've managed to do so far is "firehose search", which is only useful for realtime events unfolding. They probably should have been thinking about "topic search" and "person sear…
Yeah, the inability to search your Twitter feed is simply infuriating. This is an embarrassingly parallel problem, so the issue isn't scale slowing the development of Search down. Twitter just doesn't give a shit.