Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why implement a rejected non-standard feature whose primary purpose is to enable surveillance? Something that's in the spec that matters (WHATWG) but not the one that desperately pretends to still have relevance for HTML though it hasn't since it tried to push XHTML 2 (W3C) isn't “rejected” or “nonstandard” in any meaningful sense.
WHATWG, also known as We Have Aligned Totally With Google... The company that has an effectively complete control over the "standard" and churns it frequently to discourage competition...
Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
121–130 of 203 posts
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#122To add a little color and for clarity: Some google links (notably shopping links for products) don't just point at a google-owned redirect (presumably for ad tracking/payment calculation?), they also change the link target on click (?!?evil!?!). There are redirect-removal addons which re-write the original URL correctly, but the on-click handlers mangle the target of the link if the event is not blocked.
>> There are redirect-removal addons which re-write the original URL correctly, but the on-click handlers mangle the target of the link if the event is not blocked. On-click event handlers should never have been allowed. Hijacking the browser UI is never in the users interest.
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#123It is really worth it to switch to DuckDuckGo. You can throw a g! at the end of your search if you don't like the results DDG gave and it will redirect you to Google. That was the feature that gave me the confidence to switch over, it's painless to get different results, even on a mobile keyboard.
Isn't it "!g" or do both work?
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#124It is really worth it to switch to DuckDuckGo. You can throw a g! at the end of your search if you don't like the results DDG gave and it will redirect you to Google. That was the feature that gave me the confidence to switch over, it's painless to get different results, even on a mobile keyboard.
DuckDuckGo also tracks what links you click on. Try it: when you click on a link you'll see an immediate ping to https://improving.duckduckgo.com/t/ ... (Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)
The problem is Google has implemented the tracking in such a way that it's hostile to users, preventing them from copying the target link. There are various ways that Google could allow copying the link whole also enabling tracking if it's explicitly clicked, but Google chose an anti-user option because it almost guarantees people click the link.
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
DuckDuckGo also tracks what links you click on. Try it: when you click on a link you'll see an immediate ping to https://improving.duckduckgo.com/t/ ... (Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)
I don't think most folks would have a problem with Google doing it the same way - it makes sense that l you'd want to know what search results were clicked on. The problem is Google has implemented the tracking in such a way that it's hostile to users, preventing them from copying the target link. There are various ways that Google could allow copying the link whole also enabling tracking if it's explicitly clicked ,…
On browsers that support it (all modern browsers except Firefox) it uses which is exactly what you're looking for.
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#126they've been doing this for a very long time. didn't know about this ping attribute for anchors though. i always just assumed it was for improving the index. the more a result gets clicked, the more relevant it must be. it's kind of a zero'th order optimization.
>the more a result gets clicked, the more relevant it must be how? the more clickbaity Yes, but how do you judge quality by action of the uninformed (clicking before viewing content)?
you could do the same for people. first off, a user looking at a search results page isn't uninformed, there's lots of signal in the results page for a search query: domain name, familiarity/recognition of domain name, abstract text quality (grammar/spelling), abstract text, spamminess, etc. for the trained eye, that's a good amount of signal, but who has a trained eye?
you could, say, have some ground truth rated webpages that you have human raters rate in house, and then you could use this to score actual users on the website in terms of who frequently picks the known best result. now you have a cohort of users who you trust in terms of clicking on quality search results.
now you just pay attention to what this cohort pays attention to and let their clicks materially boost the ranking of results.
this is just one over simplified way, i'm sure they do tons of stuff like this (with tons of other stuff to avoid abuse/seo/etc).
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#127Twitter also uses a redirect (t.co) and it's very annoying
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
> …serves no purpose for its users It might be that one of the reasons they track link clicking is to determine “bounce rate” [0] to infer how useful the result is. That is something I would want to know if I were building a search engine and wanted to verify ranking accuracy. Though I would have thought there would be better ways of tracking this than url redirection if JS is enabled. 0: #5 on https://www.spyfu.com/…
Their search results used to be great before they started doing this. In fact, they've started to suck more in the past 10 years, though probably for unrelated reasons. As the Conchords say, "what are your overheads?"
Google is in an arms race with SEO --- one Google is gradually losing. Removing relevance signals will make search results worse. That Google was able to deliver excellent results ten years ago is irrelevant today: the environment is different and if they went back to what they were doing then, results would be far worse now.
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> There are redirect-removal addons which re-write the original URL correctly, but the on-click handlers mangle the target of the link if the event is not blocked. On-click event handlers should never have been allowed. Hijacking the browser UI is never in the users interest.
I was going to upvote you, but unfortunately it required an on-click event handler.
Re: Prevent Google from mangling search result links when click/copying on Firefox
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think most folks would have a problem with Google doing it the same way - it makes sense that l you'd want to know what search results were clicked on. The problem is Google has implemented the tracking in such a way that it's hostile to users, preventing them from copying the target link. There are various ways that Google could allow copying the link whole also enabling tracking if it's explicitly clicked ,…
> There are various ways that Google could allow copying the link whole also enabling tracking if it's explicitly clicked, but Google chose an anti-user option because it almost guarantees people click the link. On browsers that support it (all modern browsers except Firefox) it uses which is exactly what you're looking for.