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

Blogwashing

eggonomy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 117 posts

Re: Blogwashing

#101

Post by disneysockputty »

sdegutis wrote: post #64
djsumdog wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a HN post a few weeks ago showing how Duck Duck Go was better at showing old content. I totally agree. We like what's fresh and new, but next time you go to a blog and read some tech article; look through their archive and see what else they've written. If you run your own blog, keep an easily indexd archive page. Mine goes back to 2007: https://battlepenguin.com/archives/

I had a blog for a decade but I realized that I would post something and nobody would read it, but then a famous programmer would post the same thing in their own blog a year later and everyone would hear about it. So I concluded that blogs are only for the well known programmers and that it’s a waste of my time to share my thoughts with “the web” as a general entity. Instead I share my thoughts with individuals when…

Smart person. I've had the same thoughts. HN is often fun and occasionally interesting, though, so I keep engaging.

Re: Blogwashing

#102

Post by disneysockputty »

ThrowAway54769 wrote: post #29
nicoburns wrote: post #3

Honestly, I feel like this is Google's fault. It shouldn't be prioritising new content as much as it does. The best articles are often "classics" from several years ago that haven't changed because they haven't needed to.

How is this Googles fault? They’re just following the market. People want “modern” information. They don’t want old stuff from two years ago.

Do people really want content from SEO spammers, though?

Re: Blogwashing

#103

Post by tacon »

pmlnr wrote: post #50
nicoburns wrote: post #3

Honestly, I feel like this is Google's fault. It shouldn't be prioritising new content as much as it does. The best articles are often "classics" from several years ago that haven't changed because they haven't needed to.

It is Google's fault. So were those when you could rank no.1 for a term without having the term on the page because the links pointing at the site had them inside the .

The classic case is the Google search for "news". CNN used to come up first, now it is second. For the longest time, the word "news" did not appear on the CNN home page. At the moment, I see four uses of the word "news", not counting menu items.

Re: Blogwashing

#104

Post by disneysockputty »

dorfsmay wrote: post #21
geocrasher wrote: post #12

If I wrote an article in 2015 and freshen it up with more relevant links, better writing, or some other thing, is it still published in 2015? Should I re-date it? Am I "gaming" the system by doing that? Or am I notifying my readers (all 3 of them!) that there is fresh content? This is actually a real question from me, and I'd love feedback. I look back on my stuff from a few years ago and the blog posts need fixing u…

Often dates are extremely relevant, for example a 10 year old hardware review won't be as relevant as a new one. On the other hand, blogs don:t have to be static, some programing technique might still be relevant, but need to be updated for a new version of the language. Solution: put a "first published" and a "last updated" date, or use a wiki that makes the revisions available online and a way to link to the differ…

Did you read TFA? "PUBLISHED TIME", "UPDATED TIME".

The issue is that blogs abuse these fields for SEO purposes.

Re: Blogwashing

#105

Post by disneysockputty »

jakobegger wrote: post #69

Another great trick is just increasing version numbers in your blog posts! People look for content relevant to their version number, so you should just make sure you have copies of your content with all the version numbers people might search for! And with version numbers, you are not limited to dates in the past, you can even write articles about the future! Here's a brilliant example: https://gorails.com/setup/ubun…

Sir, this behavior is identical to what a Blackhat SEO spammer does. Ymmv.

Re: Blogwashing

#106

Post by saagarjha »

sdegutis wrote: post #77
drakonka wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I blog to share my thoughts with myself, but in public. I blog with the intent of consolidating what I'd just learned or experienced in my mind. I've had some popular posts inbetween years of content that nobody cares about, and sometimes I'll have a reader email me about an old post I wrote and describe how it's helped them in a recent project. Or sometimes someone will comment about how they just saw a post mention…

I get that idea and it’s not new: one blog said in its subtitle “letting google index my thoughts”. But it’s the equivalent of talking out loud. Sure someone might hear you accidentally and benefit but most of the time it should be kept to ourselves. If something should be said, it should probably be written in a book. That will set at least some bar to prevent the constant stream of noise on the internet. Everyone c…

Many of my blog posts were written mostly for this reason and I get occasional emails from people who find my thoughts helpful.

Re: Blogwashing

#107

Post by geocrasher »

rchaud wrote: post #97
thrower123 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please, for the love of all that is holy, publish new information as a new post, don't silently update old content. You never know when some obscure bit that is contained in the old post that appears to be superseded by new material will turn out to be invaluable. Enough old content disappears from the internet organically.

> publish new information as a new post, don't silently update old content. But the new post likely wouldn't rank as well as the old post, so you are less likely to find it using search. It would be a better user experience if the original post had a clear indicator stating that it was updated with new information on X date.

I agree, and will be cross linking posts accordingly.

Re: Blogwashing

#108

Post by ssivark »

Enginerrrd wrote: post #92
dredmorbius wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No greater mistake can be made than to imagine that what has been written latest is always the more correct; that what is written later on is an improvement on what was written previously; and that every change means progress. Men who think and have correct judgment, and people who treat their subject earnestly, are all exceptions only. Vermin is the rule everywhere in the world: it is always at hand and busily engag…

>No greater mistake can be made than to imagine that what has been written latest is always the more correct; that what is written later on is an improvement on what was written previously I feel this way about math books a lot actually, especially calculus. When we really formalized the foundations of calculus using limits and epsilon delta arguments in proofs (instead of alternatives like Non-standard analysis see:…

Yeah, a book recommendation would be great! I’ve picked up this way of thinking over the last decade, but don’t know of a resource to recommend people.

Re: Blogwashing

#109

Post by stebann »

Old way sharing is in danger when big guys like Google don't fight back spam and black-hat SEO. I try to do my search on different search engines so older content- sometimes well established articles on programming - and meaningful new content can both go to surface. Since four or five years ago if you search something with Google then sponsored content goes first, sometimes it's just brand propaganda.

Re: Blogwashing

#110

Post by stebann »

zafiro17 wrote: post #93

Prioritizing new content is going to exacerbate a lot of already existing problems with the WWW. I won't echo the already good list of reasons why old content is relevant. But I will point out it will usher in a new era of re-showing you old content that has been repurposed "as new" via minor edits. And it's going to also help convince a growing audience of web surfers that only the latest/greatest is worth knowing a…

Yes, exactly that. Also Google doesn't take actions when you report something or they just dismissed the reports: spam-blogging, spam results when you're looking for references, badly translated news sites copying content from legitimate sources, and the list goes on.
Post reply on HN