The acid test: can I find a brownie recipie without any fucking around? ...nope, I still can't.
Go back to a simpler time... `before:2015 inurl:blogspot.com`
New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
31–40 of 205 posts
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#32The acid test: can I find a brownie recipie without any fucking around? ...nope, I still can't.
My go to site for baking recipes is Smitten Kitchen. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Asmittenkitchen.... I realize adding `site:...` is probably fucking around. But trust me, her brownie recipes are worth it. :-)
Katherine Hepburn has the brownie thing smacked down. Look no further.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#33I would really love for Google to provide advanced search capabilities or filters to superusers who know EXACTLY what they are searching for. I wouldn't even mind paying for it tbh.
Have you checked out Kagi? It’s exactly what you’re looking for and more. They have a blog post on the front page rn about their integration with Wolfram Alpha.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#34So far their solution seems to be ranking Reddit for every query.
[flagged]
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#35The best way to improve Google search results is to stop and use Kagi[0]. Seriously. If you are reading this article and these comments then you must be somewhat interested in search results. Do yourself (and the search world) a favor and subscribe.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#36The post alludes to it, but one of the targets here is AI-generated content. > We’ve long had a policy against using automation to generate low-quality or unoriginal content at scale with the goal of manipulating search rankings. This policy was originally designed to address instances of content being generated at scale where it was clear that automation was involved. > Today, scaled content creation methods are mor…
And I’m reading this to say they can’t reliably detect whether something is AI-generated or not, so they’re not going to try. Whether human or AI or otherwise procedurally generated, sounds like they want to target this kind of low quality long tail search stuff.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#37The acid test: can I find a brownie recipie without any fucking around? ...nope, I still can't.
Just opened incognito window and entered "brownie recipe"... the first link is to "Love and Lemons" site which seems pretty good - there is a pretty small introduction, but then there is ingredients list, steps, etc.. top 5 links all look pretty good to me. (At least in web design area... I have no ideas if recipes themselves are tasty or not) Maybe it's a regional thing (I am in the US)? Or your profile is messed up…
Just checked out Love and Lemons. Sorry but I can't say it impressed me at all. The vast majority of the page is blogspam garbage. Nobody needs a ten-paragraph introduction and an explanation of why you're using cocoa powder and vanilla in a brownie recipe.
Interestingly the first result for "brownie recipe" for me is BBC Food which is about as close to no-BS as you'll find.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#38"To better address these techniques, we’re strengthening our policy to focus on this abusive behavior — producing content at scale to boost search ranking — whether automation, humans or a combination are involved"
But this isn't the problem.
People are just generating boatloads of "AI" generated pages with a bunch of ads. They don't need to be #1 in the search list, they just need some of their pages to appear in the search list frequently enough that the ads google places on those pages turn a profit.
Which google also knows, but again they're selling the ads, so they're getting a cut of it as well.
As long as google doesn't penalize pages on the basis of how many ad services and similar they use (and penalize google ads at the same rate) this will continue, and as long as it continues google profits from it. I get that a number of the engineers might not like that, but enough of them do that they long ago threw out basic privacy, accuracy of search results, and even the relevance of ads.
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#39I read that as "New ways we're tacking spammy, low-quality content on Search"
An eye opener for me was that I didn't question it. Has Google really fallen so low?
Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search
#40I would really love for Google to provide advanced search capabilities or filters to superusers who know EXACTLY what they are searching for. I wouldn't even mind paying for it tbh.
Just Pay Kagi, they already have all of it and it works, it's in production.
Personally, I think they deserve the money, they offered a better paid product and never sold advertisements, which I think is a scummy model.