201–210 of 551 posts
Is there a word for things that are both hilarious and tragic? I laughed out loud multiple times. Kudos to the author for making such a depressing topic so hysterical.
> Is there a word for things that are both hilarious and tragic? Yes, tragicomic. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tragicomic
——
I hate it when i see such useless explanations
> I looked into a half-dozen or so alternatives, but all the other companies were either simply Google ads re-sellers, which is an ecosystem I don't quite understand, or were extremely sketchy, and had reviews complaining about how they trick people into downloading malware and such. This is so true. I have tried to monetize my tools with ads quite a few times before, and the only way was to use Adsense. It's actuall…
Funnily enough some Google resellers are paying more than Google. I have no clue how, they must be burning investors' money
Maybe it's time for a market cap maximum. If your market cap exceeds the median GDP of all African countries, you get broken up. No more borg controlling the internet. This should help prevent vertical consolidation. Truly corporate death penalty any children of breakups who collude (full loss to equity, half loss to creditors, assets auction to public). Google shouldn't exist at its scale, nor should Apple, Microsof…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that Google started weighing time spent on page very heavily in their ranking algorithm - I don't remember at what point this happened but it must be about a decade ago by now. Every time a user clicks a Google result without using "Open in New Tab" and clicks the back button, Google gets a signal about how long they spent on the page. The longer a user spends on the site, the stronger the signal. Once…
Yup. This is the Long Click metric. Evaluating search is difficult because it's a tension: if users click a lot, is it because they find many valuable things, or because they didn't find what they were looking for? If a user clicked just once, is it because they found what they were looking for or just that the rest of the results were so bad the user gave up? The long click (user clicked, then didn't click again for…
Last year a friend and I made a website about the Nurburgring. It provided basic info for first time visitors that we were missing on our first visit. My friend spent a lot of time creating a UI with a custom map for displaying locations and routes. I wrote a bunch of content that was thoroughly researched. At a certain point we ended up being invited by one of the largest rental companies to see whether we could wor…
It's a fair point about how awful recipe sites look without ad blockers, but this part is just plain incorrect: > You can tell just by looking at the URLs that those sites are going to be worthelss blogspam. At least two of the three results in the screenshot are from legitimate baking sites (Cookie and Kate, Sally's Baking Addiction) which are generally trusted sources online. I don't know anything about the third.…
I just looked up Cookie and Kate. On my iPad I had to flick 7 times to get past the exposition on Crispy Roasted Chickpeas and find the actual ingredients. When I found the ingredients, they occupied a small squeezed sliver of the page. As I was counting the number of simultaneous ads surrounding the ingredient list (4 separate ads), a pop up covered them all and suggested I sign up for her newsletter. The recipe loo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never heard that word, perhaps it's more of an American expression? In the UK we'd probably say bittersweet.
Tragicomic is used often in Swedish (Tragikomiskt). There is a nuance difference between tragicomic and bittersweet. Bittersweet is when you daughter moves out to her own place,it's sad that your kid grew up but also great, it's bittersweet but not tragicomic. Tragicomic is when something is so screwed up that the only thing you can do is laugh at it.
There's also the laugh-cry emoji, which can be used for both situations, I think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume they would just pull some shenanigans to stay under the cap.
I wish there was a way to turn “I’m pretty sure this business is pulling some BS” into “Just shut them the fuck down already”. But that would probably require the Justice system to work.
If you figure out a system where that happens reliably, you've basically solved civilization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not entirely fair. The problem is that Google forces actual good cooks to make their recipes look like worthless blogspam, but a good original recipe is not actually worthless blogspam, even when disguised in the way Google requires.
Nobody forces you to put ads on anything. The idea that every website or tool with lots of visitors should be monetized is sad. Original author made a tool, why do you have to make money on it? Perhaps it sad that websites without ads aren't ranked higher.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if Google didn't make site more appealing, Google2 or Google3 or Google4 or SomeOtherCompetitor5 might but the problem is that there are no "2,3,4,5' options - there's only one. And it has no incentive for "good people" to leverage
Ok, theres only one option. But let's imagine you're CEO of option 2. What do you think you might do differently which would make this site, in its original form, appealing to advertise on? Having multiple ad companies doesn't sound like an improvement when the advertising space on offer doesn't seem to be good for advertising. Or to put it another way, do you feel this space does have value, but Google is leaving th…