21–30 of 51 posts
Look at the slide entitled Gmail (5), and compare the picture with the first graph on my blog post http://jeremykun.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/the-perceptron-and... It just goes to show, Google steals content without attribution just like everyone else.
I am trying really hard to ignore the Futurama picture. Really hard!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine they have a release process to get something on research.google.com, though. So the company is endorsing it.
What do you expect them to do? Somehow do an image-similarity search throughout the web for every image used in papers by their employees?
My mathematician friend pointed out that all that "research at google" requires "experience with large data sets and quantitative analysis". They want statisticians, not mathematicians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine they have a release process to get something on research.google.com, though. So the company is endorsing it.
What do you expect them to do? Somehow do an image-similarity search throughout the web for every image used in papers by their employees?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine they have a release process to get something on research.google.com, though. So the company is endorsing it.
What do you expect them to do? Somehow do an image-similarity search throughout the web for every image used in papers by their employees?
Search also puts a lot of effort into identifying duplicated content to punish content farms. I've heard they're making progress on detecting algorithmically spun articles too (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_spinning).
Oh, and they have it for images. Here's the search result for the one they used: https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZivFQlmjC8rcxWC0MZ...
So yes, it'd be trivial for them to do so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PageRank is definitely still used, although it's doubtfully the sole determinant of ranking results. See http://jeremykun.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/googles-page-rank-...
I agree with your statement, but I'm confused by the story in the link... I haven't come across a message board that doesn't use rel="nofollow" in a few years (that NYT article is from 2010). How would these negative reviews bolster his PageRank?
Seeing PageRank discussed reminds me of a piece of fun trivia. The idea for PageRank came out of the success of the Science Citation Index, which ranks papers according to how often they have been cited. The idea of trying to study the structure of citations in academia came out of people who were inspired by a 1948 essay, As We May Think . But that essay's main topic was an imagined technology called memex, to be im…
Do they still heavily rely on PageRank? With the amount of traffic data Google has, I would expect more statistical approaches based on what users click (rather than graph algorithms based on how the web is linked) to be the backbone for ranking their results.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you expect them to do? Somehow do an image-similarity search throughout the web for every image used in papers by their employees?
I would expect them to read it once, and bounce it back to the author saying something along the lines of "Cite your sources, please." That's certainly within Google's power, no?
Look at the slide entitled Gmail (5), and compare the picture with the first graph on my blog post http://jeremykun.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/the-perceptron-and... It just goes to show, Google steals content without attribution just like everyone else.
It's one guy who happens to work for Google, rather than the whole company.