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

171–180 of 205 posts

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

#171

Post by Moldoteck »

al_borland wrote: post #166
Moldoteck wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm not defending it. It's a result of google's ranking system+ad system. All these descriptions are not for users to read, these are for google crawler to rank higher in search+to get more money from randomly placed ads. If you don't do this, chances are high your website will rank lower compared to someone that did this considering other factors are the same. I'm just saying that out of the all bad options, this option with a button is less bad, you skip all(most) unnecessary stuff with a button click

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

#172

Post by semolino »

alpaca128 wrote: post #160
wyre wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> integration with Wolfram Alpha That blog post was about the WA founder joining them, I don't remember reading something about integration.

> "By integrating Wolfram Alpha’s extensive knowledge base and robust algorithms into Kagi’s search platform..."

https://blog.kagi.com/kagi-wolfram

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

#173

Post by buildsjets »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #136
buildsjets wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I googled MIL-C-44072 and it popped right up. http://everyspec.com/MIL-SPECS/MIL-SPECS-MIL-C/MIL-C-44072C_...

I had to squint to see the actual content

That’s what she said about you, too. Hey-o!

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

#174

Post by sgarland »

al_borland wrote: post #162
sollewitt wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I also frequently wonder what the excess cost (monetary, environmental, etc.) is for the modern web’s habits. Optimized schema? Nah, just chuck everything into a huge JSON blob. Need one function that you could honestly write yourself? Import this huge package instead.

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

#175

Post by al_borland »

Moldoteck wrote: post #171
al_borland wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm not defending it. It's a result of google's ranking system+ad system. All these descriptions are not for users to read, these are for google crawler to rank higher in search+to get more money from randomly placed ads. If you don't do this, chances are high your website will rank lower compared to someone that did this considering other factors are the same. I'm just saying that out of the all bad options, this op…

I think the main point is that all this trash is a problem Google created, and has no incentive to fix. The web would be a much better place with these practices weren’t the foundation of SEO.

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

#176

Post by pixelfarmer »

yedava wrote: post #55

As AI generated content takes over the web, algorithmic search will become increasingly useless. In fact, for many things - like what to buy - it already is useless. Your best bet is asking your family/friend/neighborhood groups. If I had trillions like google does, I'd invest in hiring a whole bunch of humans to curate a search index that is actually useful. It's something a new player will never be able to scale up…

> If I had trillions like google does, I'd invest in hiring a whole bunch of humans to curate a search index that is actually useful.

Curated and sorted link lists were a big thing back in the early days of the WWW. So ... back to the roots, yes?

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

#177

Post by pavel_lishin »

yedava wrote: post #55

As AI generated content takes over the web, algorithmic search will become increasingly useless. In fact, for many things - like what to buy - it already is useless. Your best bet is asking your family/friend/neighborhood groups. If I had trillions like google does, I'd invest in hiring a whole bunch of humans to curate a search index that is actually useful. It's something a new player will never be able to scale up…

> As AI generated content takes over the web, algorithmic search will become increasingly useless

I'd love a way to search for things, and exclude anything created after 2020.

Sure, it won't help me find reviews of new restaurants, or understand new products or programming languages.

On the other hand, if I'm interested in reviews of a novel written in 1988, or how to solve some particular problem using calculus, that information isn't likely to go stale.

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

#178

Post by pavel_lishin »

kristofferR wrote: post #132
yedava wrote: post #55

As AI generated content takes over the web, algorithmic search will become increasingly useless. In fact, for many things - like what to buy - it already is useless. Your best bet is asking your family/friend/neighborhood groups. If I had trillions like google does, I'd invest in hiring a whole bunch of humans to curate a search index that is actually useful. It's something a new player will never be able to scale up…

> Your best bet is asking your family/friend/neighborhood groups. Where should the ones you ask get information about the best options? It seems much more likely that someone bought something for the wrong reason (easiest to find, being fooled by fake reviews etc) and then are recommending it onward because they are reasonably happy with it.

> Where should the ones you ask get information about the best options?

You ask multiple acquaintances who've purchased different things, and focus on the specifics of their experiences with those products or services, and figure out whether those things would work for you.

> and then are recommending it onward because they are reasonably happy with it.

If they're reasonably happy with it, why wouldn't I be reasonably happy with it?

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

#180

Post by CamperBob2 »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #177
yedava wrote: post #55

As AI generated content takes over the web, algorithmic search will become increasingly useless. In fact, for many things - like what to buy - it already is useless. Your best bet is asking your family/friend/neighborhood groups. If I had trillions like google does, I'd invest in hiring a whole bunch of humans to curate a search index that is actually useful. It's something a new player will never be able to scale up…

> As AI generated content takes over the web, algorithmic search will become increasingly useless I'd love a way to search for things, and exclude anything created after 2020. Sure, it won't help me find reviews of new restaurants, or understand new products or programming languages. On the other hand, if I'm interested in reviews of a novel written in 1988, or how to solve some particular problem using calculus, tha…

Haven't asked it for any fiction reviews, but ChatGPT is nothing less than a superpower for math-related questions. (If the last time you tried it was a year ago, try it again before posting something snarky in response.)

Google definitely isn't needed for that.

Post reply on HN