“Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO” • Hacker News Board

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#221

Post by zaarn » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:32 AM UTC

adrianmonk wrote: post #159

I don't see why Pinterest does this to themselves. My main exposure to them is through Google image search and links to their site. So my first several experiences were like this. It left me with a terrible first impression. It makes me wonder if the whole site plays games and tries to waste my time. I usually don't sign up for an account the first few times I encounter a site, so in my mind it's a pretty critical ti…

The main exposure I get from Pinterest is only frustration.

When I click, accidentally, on a pinterest link on google images, I land on a site which does not work unless I enable some javascript. Once enabled, it'll proceed to load several images, none of which are the image I look for because the google result linked to some tag or search result. After the page loaded, I might be redirected to a screen that suggests I should get a pinterest account.

Pinterest is basically search result spam, it isn't what you're looking for but hey, you could send the Pinterestian Prince your data anyway!

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#222

Post by bringtheaction » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:47 AM UTC

Meanwhile perhaps the Personal Blocklist by Google ads-on for Chrome can help?

Not sure if it works on image search also.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/personal-blocklist...

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#223

Post by aerique » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:52 AM UTC

ValentineC wrote: post #107

jws wrote: post #22

In days of old it was pretty easy to ban a site from your Google search results. It looks like they have removed that function. I wonder why? I know I liked having certain low value (to me) sites not clutter up my results. A little article about the feature, sorry it is going to try to throw an interrupting DIV at you– https://searchengineland.com/google-block-sites-feature-1464...

It's in the article you linked to, but I suppose Google expects everyone to use their Personal Blocklist Chrome extension now: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/personal-blocklist...

Ah, so they removed it to peddle their Chrome browser.

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#224

Post by classics2 » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 9:58 AM UTC

adrianmonk wrote: post #159

I don't see why Pinterest does this to themselves. My main exposure to them is through Google image search and links to their site. So my first several experiences were like this. It left me with a terrible first impression. It makes me wonder if the whole site plays games and tries to waste my time. I usually don't sign up for an account the first few times I encounter a site, so in my mind it's a pretty critical ti…

Pinterest has no product. They only want traffic.

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#225

Post by andrewaylett » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 10:02 AM UTC

iamdave wrote: post #193

admax88q wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All my web platforms searches are now "mdn " cause w3schools is never informative enough for me.

I actually have a couple of bash scripts just for this when I want to look something up specifically at mdn, and thought about expanding it to stack overflow and reddit. What's that? Why yes I have heard the phrase 'bikeshedding', why do you ask? ;)

DDG's `!` searches are your friend:

`!mdn whatever` will search MDN. Similarly !so, !reddit and a whole lot more.

https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#226

Post by nialv7 » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 10:08 AM UTC

CM30 wrote: post #2

It should, but this also illustrates a problem with Google Search that they'll need to grapple with in the future. Namely, that while they should treat all sites equally, in practicality there's not really much incentive to on their part. Think about it. Let's say Google does remove Pinterest altogether, banning the site as a punishment for 'gaming' the system. What then? The people that do search for Pinterest will…

> What then? The people that do search for Pinterest will find it missing, and likely assume Google screwed up/their search engine is broken.

Also, this is censorship. You can say _this_ censorship is good just because it censors something you don't like.

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#227

Post by bornonline1 » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 10:36 AM UTC

hungerstrike wrote: post #175

I hate this business model of using your audience to steal other sites content. Why doesn't Google link directly to the source of the content instead of Pinterest anyway? Maybe they don't care; they did invent AMP, which has some parallels with the way Pinterest works. Anyway, when I started using DuckDuckGo on my phone to get away from AMP - I noticed that whenever I search for recipes on DuckDuckGo - they generally…

I agree with you. You have to log in to every single website for the 'personalization sake'. I hate personalization and the login.

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#228

Post by pjc50 » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 10:37 AM UTC

nialv7 wrote: post #226

CM30 wrote: post #2

It should, but this also illustrates a problem with Google Search that they'll need to grapple with in the future. Namely, that while they should treat all sites equally, in practicality there's not really much incentive to on their part. Think about it. Let's say Google does remove Pinterest altogether, banning the site as a punishment for 'gaming' the system. What then? The people that do search for Pinterest will…

> What then? The people that do search for Pinterest will find it missing, and likely assume Google screwed up/their search engine is broken. Also, this is censorship. You can say _this_ censorship is good just because it censors something you don't like.

Google has done this kind of ranking adjustment for _years_. It's necessary in order to make sure the search results are relevant rather than hundreds of pages of SEO spam.

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#229

Post by pjc50 » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 10:40 AM UTC

koboll wrote: post #160

tambourine_man wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it’s not a popular opinion, but I actually like W3schools. Most of their infamous errors are gone and they are usually more “to the point” than Mozilla docs, which are a sometimes too prolific and not as clear.

It's "to the point" in the sense of being a more concise basic introduction. But MDN hits the right balance of being comprehensive yet accessible in a way nothing else does. Plus W3Schools' very name is an SEO hack, so their Google rank is built upon fundamental dishonesty.

How is "w3schools" an SEO hack more than any other name?

Re: “Pinterest needs to be removed from Google IMO”

#230

Post by whywhywhywhy » Mon, Mar 19, 2018, 10:44 AM UTC

Been saying this myself for a while now and reporting Pintrest links when I can be bothered. Complete abuse of the system to use it as the top of their funnel and as usual people who advocate the service don't even realise it's doing this awful behaviour.