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

New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 205 posts

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#161

Post by esperent »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #53
nlh wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This seems good though. Reminds me of https://xkcd.com/810/

Yes, but not quite.

It's that we can't tell the difference between the AI generated SEO spam and the human generated SEO spam, not that the AI has started to generate actually useful websites. And there was already so much human generated SEO spam that it couldn't be effectively moderated, but now the problem is a hundred times worse.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#162

Post by al_borland »

sollewitt wrote: post #51
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #47

My "bar" for how Google does here is how it treats recipe pages. I absolutely loath what SEO has done for recipe pages, because now essentially every recipe page looks exactly the same: 1. Tons and tons of content about the history of the recipe, how humans first domesticated wheat, when the ancient Egyptians first discovered yeast as a leavening agent, etc. etc. 2. Then, after thousands and thousands of words, there…

Is the long text purely for SEO or because a longer page gives more opportunities for ad impressions and higher engagement metrics?

I think forcing a user to scroll past 20 ads is a huge part of it. Usually by the time I get halfway down the page I give up on the idea of cooking.

I sometimes wonder how much of the costs associated with running a website are to pay for all the bandwidth for ads, SEO experts, etc… when a simple site with HTML and a dash of CSS could likely host recipes very cheaply.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#163

Post by al_borland »

lostruinsofraku wrote: post #86

I am interested to see the results of this. I had Kagi but got rid of it due to the cost. The results were a little better overall, but asking Gemini or Bing gets me to the same place faster most of the time. If I have to search manually, independent of the search engine, I am going to have to open like 3-8 tabs to get my answer most of the time. The difference between having Kagi and not having it is a couple more m…

For me using Kagi is also a way to help push sites that actually respect the user. My hope is that if it gains enough traction it will force some of these bigger sites to abandon some of their dark patterns. And in the meantime, I get a much better experience with no ads, and constant new features, which makes search feel new and interesting again.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#164

Post by [deleted] »

Shog9 wrote: post #140
ruszki wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So this fall, as I flipped through Michelle Lopez’s new book Weeknight Baking, her recipe for Boxed Mix Brownies, From Scratch caught my eye. Would I finally be able to make homemade brownies that would be just as delicious as the ones from a box? I can’t even fathom how anybody thinks that this is fine on any level (from the mentioned site, the first result about brownies for me, and one of the first few paragraph…

The other advantages of buying a recipe book: - you can take notes in the margins - you can find your favorite recipes quickly because the pages are all stained and wrinkled - you can reward the author for all the time they spent testing and honing those recipes The real depressing thing here is the amount of whining about "wasted time" from folks looking for free cooking instructions on the 'Net. It's almost as bad…

[deleted]

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#165

Post by ericbarrett »

ruszki wrote: post #113
nottorp wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like these spam pages work because some people actually like them... That would be a major problem for hand curated indexes.

> So this fall, as I flipped through Michelle Lopez’s new book Weeknight Baking, her recipe for Boxed Mix Brownies, From Scratch caught my eye. Would I finally be able to make homemade brownies that would be just as delicious as the ones from a box? I can’t even fathom how anybody thinks that this is fine on any level (from the mentioned site, the first result about brownies for me, and one of the first few paragraph…

I was recently gifted a recipe book via Amazon. I was excited until I opened it up—it was just low quality LLM generated recipes, poorly typeset. There's no escape.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#166

Post by al_borland »

Moldoteck wrote: post #79
Fricken wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way too much fucking around.

to click on a button?

If the developer has to put that button on the site, they’ve already failed. They know it’s a poor design, and are trying to add features to point to that will absolve them, instead of fixing the core problem which wouldn’t force the user to look for a skip button. First time users of a site have no reason to look for a button like that, when the standard control of every other site for decades has been to scroll.

I also just went to the site. When I went to tap the jump link, a modal popped up and blocked me. I dismissed that and tapped the link and it jumped me down the page to yet another request to sign up for a newsletter I don’t want. Now the top 3rd of the page is a video that started to auto-play; I had to tap to dismiss that. When I scrolled into the recipe section I got yet another modal trying to get me to sign up for an account so I can save the recipe… as if bookmarks don’t exist. I dismissed that, and now I can see the recipe. There are 3 ads in the middle of the recipe that break it up, some with more auto-playing video, and the scroll keeps readjusting itself based on ads and BS popping in and out. The bottom of the page also has an ad banner to dismiss, a bookmark icon that bounces occasional (which is certainly just another attempt to get me to create an account), links to other recipes are sliding in and out depending on the direction I scroll, to try to get me to go other places on the site… and to top it off, the Pinterest flag blocks content, depending on where I scroll, while sometimes being blocked itself by the aforementioned recipe slide-in.

How can anyone defend all this? It’s horrible.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#167

Post by al_borland »

aurareturn wrote: post #76
ajhurliman wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a monthly subscription that apparently a lot of people are willing to pay for, feels like an honest business which is shocking in tech.

We don't know if they're profitable doing this. One day, they might go kaput as well.

In the early days a user could go into their setting, see the cost per search, and the total cost of their use per month, compared to what they paid. I threw some extra money their way when I was my use exceeded what I paid. But that was before they changed up their pricing structure.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#168

Post by rchaud »

lupire wrote: post #100
minimaxir wrote: post #4

The 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…

Also, Google launches a tool to AI-generate web pages at scale. Maybe Search will be able to detect those Google generated pages. https://thehill.com/policy/technology/4492468-google-paying-...

And to close the loop of shareholder value, Google will introduce Search Plus - a subscription-only search product that will hide AI content.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#169

Post by al_borland »

aaomidi wrote: post #62
iamthepieman wrote: post #35

The 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. [0] https://kagi.com

There is so much Kagi references on HN that I’m slowly beginning to feel sus about it. I’m not saying this is happening (I’m not saying anyone is a shill). It’s just making me feel a little “hmm” about it.

I talk about it here, but I first stumbled across it on Mastodon. I think it’s more that the type of users Mastodon and HN attracts are the same type of people to pay for a search engine and be excited about a search engine.

I have long hated that “free with ads” is the first and only business model anyone thinks can work on the internet, so I want to support companies that are willing to push back against that. Ads in search create a conflict of interest that I don’t like. Ads in most products create a conflict of interest I don’t like.

I pay for YouTube Premium for a similar ideological reason. I want to support the business model that doesn’t rely on showing me ads. In a perfect world, this would mean that the features and algorithms of YouTube would change to prioritize me as a user, rather than pushing constant consumption, but with Google its baby steps.

Re: New ways we're tackling spammy, low-quality content on Search

#170

Post by rchaud »

janalsncm wrote: post #59
quitit wrote: post #16

This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it is also kind of true: The easiest way for Google to detect spammy, low-quality content is to ... simply add up the number of Google Ads placements on the page. Those flooding the internet with garbage content are doing so because the verbiage is tightly intermingled with Google Ad placements, that's the business model. Google -could- go a step further and deactivate those account…

There was a freakonomics podcast episode about this the other day. Basically, plumbers with names like “AAA Plumbing” tend to be worse. Plumbers who can’t compete on service tend to try to directly game the rankings.

In this case, 'tend to be worse' could simply mean they receive more negative reviews, because the overall volume of jobs they pick up is huge compared to plumbers who didn't try to manipulate where they appeared in the directory. Happy customers leave fewer reviews than angry ones.
Post reply on HN