Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google algorithm change launched

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 203 posts

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#121

Post by PaulJDrago »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #36
miah_ wrote: post #31

This is awesome! Now if only I could completely remove certain sites from my search results ala the Google Wiki stuff. I'd love to drop swik, and expertsexchange and a few other annoying sites. Its possible this algorithm change will make these sites less annoying to me though.

Second that. WTB ability to customize my search results by blacklisting certain sites. Big change I know, but would be a hugely useful service Google could provide.

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/33156 never mind I just went out and found a script for it...

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#122

Post by 23david »

Will this new change impact the issue where scrapers that take videos and video descriptions from youtube and turn them into 'blog posts' show up higher than the youtube page that contains the actual original content? I worked for nearly a year producing a few hundred videos only to find that spam sites (usually running adsense ads) were showing up ahead of the video on youtube.com and my own site. Our site's domain name was even plastered all over the description and it still didn't matter. The spam sites still showed up way ahead of us in the search results.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#123

Post by nostrademons »

daleharvey wrote: post #98
optimusclimb wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully - Sites like yours ruin the internet. You admit it yourself: you produce no content of your own. I do NOT want to see results from pages of that ilk when I google for things. Google made the right choice to de-index it.

Google (in the context of search) produce no content of their own, are they ruining the internet?

The goal from the user's perspective is to get to the content they want as quickly as possible. A search engine helps in that, as presumably you don't know where the content you want is if you're visiting a search engine. A search engine that links to an aggregator site doesn't - the search engine should just send you to the original content directly.

Presumably, aggregator sites by themselves also help in content discovery. I find a lot of content through Hacker News. But they should do so by being good enough to be a destination in themselves. An aggregator that needs to be found by search engine isn't doing users any favors.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#124

Post by tlianza »

gcb wrote: post #95
optimusclimb wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully - Sites like yours ruin the internet. You admit it yourself: you produce no content of your own. I do NOT want to see results from pages of that ilk when I google for things. Google made the right choice to de-index it.

> Sites like yours ruin the internet. You admit it yourself: you produce no content of your own are you talking to the parent post or matt? /sarcasm

Though sarcastic, I think this succinctly summarizes the issue.

Aggregators, it's time to wake up. Google is not your friend, Google is your competitor.

We can agree that Bing and Google are competitors, right? And we can agree that Bing labels themselves a "Decision Engine" and not a "Search Engine" right?

The line between a Search->Decision->Topical Aggregation Engine is so blurry I'm not sure it exists anymore. Google's stated mission is to "organize the world's information." - they are going to add social and they are going to use your preferences to figure out which stories/pages are interesting to you.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#125

Post by radley »

nikothefinn wrote: post #84

Since Matt is responding here, I figured this is worth a shot, no harm in asking. Matt, would love a response from you if you get a chance, since the Webmaster Tools appeals process gives no insight whatsoever to our situation. Following on from one of the comments here, namely the idea that "value is in the eye of the beholder", I'd like to raise our own plight. I run a number of aggregator sites - the largest and o…

As an aggregation site, your SEO shouldn't expect to outrank the content you're sourcing - that's unethical. At best, your SEO should focus on the service you provide.

Looking at your site, it's easy to see why Google bumped you down:

http://technifi.com/

http://technifi.com/news/Egypt-Leaves-the-Internet-3841691.h...

It looks like your service is nothing like Techmeme, adding ad-related pages prior to accessing significant content. And the context-aware parts seems to lack any form of editorial choice, such as the Google-image Vodafone photos. In short, you have no insight, let alone opinion, and thus add nothing of value to the information.

Now aware of your site, I don't find any benefit and would ignore it or add it to my block list in my custom Google search.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#126

Post by [deleted] »

nostrademons wrote: post #123
daleharvey wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google (in the context of search) produce no content of their own, are they ruining the internet?

The goal from the user's perspective is to get to the content they want as quickly as possible. A search engine helps in that, as presumably you don't know where the content you want is if you're visiting a search engine. A search engine that links to an aggregator site doesn't - the search engine should just send you to the original content directly. Presumably, aggregator sites by themselves also help in content di…

[deleted]

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#127

Post by Sephr »

tomrod wrote: post #17
Matt_Cutts wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The high-order bit for me is that Stack Overflow is #1 for both pages. We can do localization based on TLD: the query [bank] will return different results on google.com vs. google.ie, for example. Without doing a deep dig yet, we might have thought that open-mag.com was more helpful for European searchers, for example. It looks like that site is based in Portugal.

Kudos for keeping locational variety. Is there a flag/keyword we can enter into the search to ignore location?

Some people may recommend http://www.google.com/ncr, but have you tried actually asking for English when you request pages on Google? It sounds like you don't have your Accept-Language header set to English. If an Accept-Language: en header doesn't fix the problem, you should complain on HN (with a new thread) about it instead of using /ncr. Google really should support that.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#128

Post by radley »

nikothefinn wrote: post #94
optimusclimb wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully - Sites like yours ruin the internet. You admit it yourself: you produce no content of your own. I do NOT want to see results from pages of that ilk when I google for things. Google made the right choice to de-index it.

Like I said, and others have said as well, value is in the eye of the beholder - if you follow your own logic, then every single aggregator, including the likes of HuffPo (something like 60-70% of their content is little "curated snippets" from around the web), are ruining the internet. There is very little "truly original" content out there, virtually every single blog rehashes the content of others. Is Techmeme of…

Those services add value to the content - comments, votes, opinion, and/or journalistic research.

You guys have it, but it's buried under a pile of spam. Lose the spam and you'll recover your integrity.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#129

Post by haberman »

daleharvey wrote: post #98
optimusclimb wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully - Sites like yours ruin the internet. You admit it yourself: you produce no content of your own. I do NOT want to see results from pages of that ilk when I google for things. Google made the right choice to de-index it.

Google (in the context of search) produce no content of their own, are they ruining the internet?

I go to Google when I want to find something. I click on a link when I think I have found what I'm looking for. When I click on that link, I want to go straight to my destination, not get lost in an maze of sites that do nothing but link to each other and dilute the content.

I go to Google because it provides value to me. Aggregator / republishing sites trick you into visiting them with the lure of what looks like actual, original content. This makes the internet less useful because you end up reading the same content over and over.

Re: Google algorithm change launched

#130

Post by lallysingh »

eurohacker wrote: post #48

may be here is a good place to ask - may be someone can answer - what does the term "original content" actually mean , original in what sense ? if you have a blog about wines, then what do you need to write - in order to be "original" blog about wines - does it mean mostly: 1) express original opinions about wines, 2) original structure of sentence and original wording - but the same opinions that 10 other sites writ…

I think this is a much simpler content, as in not being a literal copy of another's text.

To be an "original" wine blog, write your own blog entries. Don't copy someone else's.

Post reply on HN