Earlier quoted context omitted.
seriously, any Googlers around that are close enough to search to know why Pinterest is still dominating image results despite being incredibly low quality? this is a widely known problem.
We have had a few posts about this, a blog from an ex-employee explained it basically as Pintrest spending tens of millions to do everthing they can to game Google search results and they arn't going to stop any time soon. Pinterest just puts A LOT of time and money into SEO.
Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
471–480 of 571 posts
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#472Earlier quoted context omitted.
pinterest. Bane of all image searches.
yelp, pinterest, w3schools
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#473Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I think it's more dangerous when wide-reaching platforms like CNN spread misinformation about him and are completely unapologetic about it [0]. The most Joe Rogan has done regarding "misinformation" is telling people they should not get the vaccine and discussing vaccine side effects that, while yes they are not great in number, for every other platform it's a taboo topic for some weird reason. [0] https://www.you…
> The most Joe Rogan has done regarding "misinformation" is telling people they should not get the vaccine I'm baffled by this comment and how that alone isn't concerning to you. All the experts say the vaccine is safe and effective, and yet we have people listening to Joe Rogan on the topic. Joe Rogan also claimed to have taken ivermectin and experimental antibodies and yet seems to claim that ivermectin is what did…
He’s said repeatedly that he doesn’t see the point of young fit and healthy people getting the Covid “vaccine”. And especially not for kids. If you are old or have medical conditions or obese, then it might help you. The current shots are merely a potential severe symptom mitigator.
Being opposed to a non-long term tested, short lasting, unaccountable shot which doesn’t even prevent catching and transmission of the virus doesn’t make someone anti-vax. Also opposing mandates of such a "vaccine" doesn't make someone "anti-vax".
This is very specific to the Covid “vaccine”, not for other typical vaccines like polio, measles etc which are long term tested for over 70 years (smallpox for 2 centuries) and are also super effective at preventing catching and transmitting the virus.
The current Covid shots don’t even fit the definition of a vaccine as they don’t prevent catching and transmission of the virus in any meaningful way. And even mild and asymptomatic cases have the same viral load as the unvaccinated which basically creates the problem of “silent spreaders”.
The definition of a "vaccine" is supposed to be: "The term “vaccine” means any substance designed to be administered to a human being for the prevention of 1 or more diseases."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/4132#a_2
The Canadian definition is: "When you're vaccinated, you build immunity (ability to resist infection). This protects you from getting the disease and prevents you from spreading it to others. Some vaccines protect you for several years and some protect you for the rest of your life."
When something isn't preventing the disease, nor effective after 3-6 months, how can it be considered a "vaccine"? And how can one mandate it?
As for “safe and effective”, that’s just become a false marketing term. How can you say that when 10 months after pushing the shots, they are discovering new rising side effects and Sweden, Iceland, Denmark are banning Moderna and Canada is not allowing it for under 24 year olds? Or 6 months later, they are restricting AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson? How can something be considered “safe” in this case? When something hasn’t been long term tested, how can you trust the “experts” for it being safe? And since they wane off in 3-6 months, how are they “effective”?
> claimed to have taken ivermectin and experimental antibodies
He took what his doctor prescribed him. He specifically said that both the monoclonal antibodies and maybe ivermectin too could have helped him. He didn’t say only ivermectin helped him. He also said that him being fit and healthy must have helped him, something most people don't even talk about.
Just a few years ago, same people pushing the Covid “vaccine” used to say that drugs shouldn’t be rushed and fda can’t be trusted because one-third of the drugs approved by the FDA and (by inference) Health Canada from 2001 through 2010 had major safety issues years after the medications were made widely available to patients. This was more common for those given "accelerated approval". Follow-up period was 11.7 years and it took 4.2 years after the drugs were approved for these safety concerns to come to light. Given longer lifespans for youth, there is a potential for harm. So, it is perfectly valid for youth to be concerned about the lack of long-term safety data for the COVID-19 vaccines. Lack of this data makes informed consent impossible.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/26253...
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/09/5275750...
https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/health/fda-approval-drug-even...
In the UK for example, the rate of cases is now higher in the fully vaccinated group in anyone over 29 age group. The 18-29 group will also soon be higher in fully vaccinated as the vaccine wanes off in 3-6 months. Yet everyone's blaming the unvaccinated instead of the ineffective "vaccine". Page 13 table:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
Please observe the nuances.
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#474I’ve been using Brave search for several months now. I switched the day that it was announced. The quality is fairly good, but I’m having troubling telling whether it’s just my own halo effect or if the initial quality that experienced has started to slip a little as it indexes more widely or something. At first I was impressed with how little spam ended up in top results, but lately exact queries for Python function…
> I continued to be baffled why such blatant spam can consistently make it into top results Same here. It's like they don't even care anymore. The results are just there to hold your interest so they can show some keyword ads along with them. I wish people would start maintaining curated web directories again.
I think they realized it's expensive, and not actually good for business if the spammy stuff is using your own ads and/or analytics anyway.
This is why almost all of the web looks like a shady spam-site if you don't have Adblock enabled. Google doesn't give a shit anymore.
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#475Earlier quoted context omitted.
His anti-vaccination stance (specific to coronavirus, I don't know if he's anti-vax in general). He pushes ivermectin as a valid alternative to the vaccines when the data does not currently back that up.
He's not an anti-vaxxer. He is pro-vaccine for all other illnesses. He's also said he doesn't care if you choose to take it, just don't mandate it For all people when the science is not clear about the cost:benefit ratio for certain populations such as children. That being against mandating these emergency experimental COVID-19 vaccines for all individuals is being conflated as being an "anti-vaxxer" shows how much p…
> That being against mandating these emergency experimental COVID-19 vaccines
They are not "experimental" by the way, THAT is propaganda/misinformation.
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#476One problem i regularly have is that the browser becomes unresponsive, e.g. won't update the screen. The only remedy is to close and open the browser.
On second thought i should probably go see if this issue is widespread.
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#477Earlier quoted context omitted.
afaik, seo spammers are quite sophisticated in masking affiliate links and tracking codes with redirect chains and other techniques. Their general assumption is that google does exactly what you expect to do and downranks affiliate spam. What are your thoughts on reputable news websites that have tons of ads and trackers because they have yet to figure out any other viable way to survive?
I think that 'reputable' and 'tons of ads and trackers' do not belong in the same sentence. Ad-supported business models incentivize the creation of large quantities of content, because you need a lot of pageviews to earn a little bit of money with ads (since most people either ignore or block ads, if they manage to load the page to see them at all). High quality journalism should have value that we are ready to pay…
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#478This seems more like trying to capture money. If this was about privacy, they could have just gone with duckduckgo.
http://dpldocs.info/this-week-in-d/Blog.Posted_2021_09_06.ht...
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#479Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's sad that Joe Rogan comes up as any kind of authority on anything besides mixed martial arts.
Why do you need to be an “authority” to talk about what you saw with your own eyes on a search engine?
Ask the GGP commenter? Why name drop if only the observation is important?
Re: Brave Search replaces Google as default search engine in the Brave browser
#480I’ve been using Brave search for several months now. I switched the day that it was announced. The quality is fairly good, but I’m having troubling telling whether it’s just my own halo effect or if the initial quality that experienced has started to slip a little as it indexes more widely or something. At first I was impressed with how little spam ended up in top results, but lately exact queries for Python function…
Some years ago Google had the option to remove a website from search results. After a few months they discontinued. It would be nice to know why, if the user adoption was too low, the computational cost too high, or the user experience too bad because users inadvertently removed good results.
Personal remove lists basically turn each query from each person with such a list into a completely distinct query, which breaks caching on multiple levels. If a few people are using such a feature or if people sometimes add a couple -sites to a query, no big deal, but if enough people used it with basically unique site lists, the performance degradation would probably make a rollback of the feature inevitable.