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

Removing my site from Google search

btao.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–119 of 119 posts

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#111

Post by _nalply »

robbrown451 wrote: post #72

It seems like the amount it will hurt Google is directly proportional to the amount it will hurt the owner of the site (assuming they want people to read their message). I'm sure someone at Google is pretty happy that they don't have to show this page in their search results. Nobody can accuse them of bias against anti-Google pages -- the site owner did it to themselves. Seems like as perfect an example of "cutting o…

Maybe. If enough people use alternative search engines it might not matter a lot for him.

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#112

Post by vultour »

robbrown451 wrote: post #72

It seems like the amount it will hurt Google is directly proportional to the amount it will hurt the owner of the site (assuming they want people to read their message). I'm sure someone at Google is pretty happy that they don't have to show this page in their search results. Nobody can accuse them of bias against anti-Google pages -- the site owner did it to themselves. Seems like as perfect an example of "cutting o…

What's the point of the remark at the end of your comment? Completely unneccessary bait for irrelevant political bickering.

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#113

Post by bilvar »

zorpner wrote: post #109
mlang23 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to imply that not voting for the left automatically means voting for the right. May I remind you that there is another option you probably forgot about? Did you ever hear about the concept of abstaining from voting?

In a two-party system (a necessary de facto in a single-member-district plurality system), failure to vote for a candidate is mathematically identical with a vote for the opposing party.

That's nonsense. By that logic both sides can claim "They didn't vote FOR us so essentially the voted for the other side", which means that by not voting you voted for both.

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#114

Post by mlang23 »

zorpner wrote: post #109
mlang23 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to imply that not voting for the left automatically means voting for the right. May I remind you that there is another option you probably forgot about? Did you ever hear about the concept of abstaining from voting?

In a two-party system (a necessary de facto in a single-member-district plurality system), failure to vote for a candidate is mathematically identical with a vote for the opposing party.

Interesting. Judging from your comment, I guess you are living in a country with a two party system and the death penalty? Well, I dont.

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#115

Post by lukas099 »

zorpner wrote: post #109
mlang23 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to imply that not voting for the left automatically means voting for the right. May I remind you that there is another option you probably forgot about? Did you ever hear about the concept of abstaining from voting?

In a two-party system (a necessary de facto in a single-member-district plurality system), failure to vote for a candidate is mathematically identical with a vote for the opposing party.

I fail to see the mathematical equivalence. One is side A: +1 side B: 0

the other is side A: 0 side B: 0

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#116

Post by GoblinSlayer »

robbrown451 wrote: post #72

It seems like the amount it will hurt Google is directly proportional to the amount it will hurt the owner of the site (assuming they want people to read their message). I'm sure someone at Google is pretty happy that they don't have to show this page in their search results. Nobody can accuse them of bias against anti-Google pages -- the site owner did it to themselves. Seems like as perfect an example of "cutting o…

>Seems like as perfect an example of "cutting off nose to spite face" as I can imagine.

If Google was purely beneficial, then yes. If no, then it's a tradeoff.

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#117

Post by EastOfTruth »

Or just block all of the IP addresses listed at these URLs:

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOGL/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-1/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-2/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-24/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-4/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-46/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-5/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOOGL-9/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GL-654/nets

https://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GL-895/nets

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#118

Post by antifa »

cubano wrote: post #56
cubano wrote: post #48

So if "surveillance capitalism" is apparently the new scare, would "surveillance socialism" be better? Or are we supposed to imagine that under socialism, there would be no need for Big Tech surveillance? This I most certainly disagree with. I'm just noticing a trend lately where the word "capitalism" is being attacked on many fronts, and I personally find that troublesome. Like Churchill said..."Capitalism is absolu…

I'm interested in why this comment is getting so knocked down? I asked what I think is a valid question and would like to hear honest reactions from people about my observation. I feel I have every right to be a cheerleader for Capitalism as my father escaped communist Cuba in 1959 as Castro was coming to power and used the US's system and tons of hard work to create a extremely comfortable life for himself, while fr…

I have this weird feeling that you probably think the United States government being overthrown and replaced with the Soviet Union 2.0 is a bad idea.

I suggest "improving society somewhat" so that doesn't happen, but I have a weird feeling that you'd also consider that socialism.

Re: Removing my site from Google search

#119

Post by renewiltord »

mlang23 wrote: post #108
renewiltord wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. That just means I can make you vote any way I want by making the dumbest argument for the other side. You advertise a strategy that guarantees that you will always cast a manipulated vote. Entertaining.

You seem to imply that not voting for the left automatically means voting for the right. May I remind you that there is another option you probably forgot about? Did you ever hear about the concept of abstaining from voting?

That is also a desired outcome. If I desire a green outcome, I only have to make blues stop voting. In multi-party system if I can make reds and yellows also stop voting it’s great. Fortunately, they will all comply even if I tell them I’m doing this. In fact, they (and you) will particularly comply when told for fear of the shame of backing down.

This pride is particularly exploitable and is why you can orchestrate all sorts of outcomes among demographics that have this vulnerability.

Post reply on HN