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

111–120 of 205 posts

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

#111

Post by freediver »

Nullabillity wrote: post #110
freediver wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the best things about paid business model for search is that it aligns incentives and decreases the risk of data mining as the business makes money through subscriptions, without any need for ads/selling data.

Doing one doesn't prevent them from doing the other. It gives them more data about you to sell, while limiting the dataset to gullible rich people who think that you can capitalism yourself out of the problems of capitalism (the prime advertising target demographic).

But what is the incentive?

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

#112

Post by Nullabillity »

freediver wrote: post #111
Nullabillity wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing one doesn't prevent them from doing the other. It gives them more data about you to sell, while limiting the dataset to gullible rich people who think that you can capitalism yourself out of the problems of capitalism (the prime advertising target demographic).

But what is the incentive?

Money?

You are the one claiming that Kagi is somehow special, trustworthy, and immune to the same influences that drags down everyone else.

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

#113

Post by ruszki »

nottorp wrote: post #105
pb7 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very first thing on the page is a "Jump to recipe" link. If you too are a victim of dwindling attention spans like the rest of us, you have the option to skip straight past the beautiful photos and background.

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 paragraphs). For a while, I rather pay for cooking and recipe books, because wasted time on these texts would worth way more than that money. Especially that even the recipes themselves are terrible most of the time on the internet.

But after a thread a few months ago here on HN, in which people praised w3schools how it’s really a good site, I’m not surprised on anything. If the people who really should know how these things work, and that there are better free alternatives for all content on that site, even encourage this bullshit, then this won’t improve at all.

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

#114

Post by ajhurliman »

amf12 wrote: post #109
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.

How much is "a lot"? The HN bubble doesn't count.

>20,000

https://blog.kagi.com/celebrating-20k

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

#115

Post by Supermancho »

Nullabillity wrote: post #106
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kagi explicitly promises not to store your history[1] and then takes your money based on that promise. If they do store your history, then they are committing fraud on a grand scale. [1] https://kagi.com/privacy

I see lots of promises, but very little proof. While, again, running a business model that massively increases the inherent risk compared to the competition.

> I can take measures to prevent Google from linking together a full profile

> I see lots of promises, but very little proof

Yet you trust google and any company that might do business with google? This view is some sort of mind game you're playing alone.

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

#116

Post by Nullabillity »

Supermancho wrote: post #115
Nullabillity wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see lots of promises, but very little proof. While, again, running a business model that massively increases the inherent risk compared to the competition.

> I can take measures to prevent Google from linking together a full profile > I see lots of promises, but very little proof Yet you trust google and any company that might do business with google? This view is some sort of mind game you're playing alone.

Who said anything about trusting Google in the first place?

My point is that Kagi's business model requires more trust in Kagi than Google's requires in Google.

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

#117

Post by itsdrewmiller »

dotnet00 wrote: post #69
itsdrewmiller wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just hacker news! They were up in arms about some actual analysis of search quality here: https://danluu.com/seo-spam/ Another common response is >Your table is wrong. I tried these queries on Kagi and got Good results for the queries [but phrase much more strongly] I'm not sure why people feel so strongly about Kagi but, all of these kinds of responses so far have come from Kagi users. No one has gotten goo…

I'm not really a fan of this person's dismissive attitude, they're trying to avoid dealing with domain rank adjustments, understandably so the results are comparable, but the adjustments are part of the value add. The testing methodology is also odd, looking specifically for yt-dlp when asking for "download youtube video", when the web based downloaders that most of the big engines turn up on top make more sense for…

fwiw I agree with you that the evaluation criteria here are not ones that I particularly care about - I'm generally pretty happy with AI-first and then expanding to search engines if I can't get what I want there. My main intent was to note that Kagi users are just genuinely that enthusiastic, since GP at least lightly implied there might be some astroturfing going on.

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

#118

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#119

Post by op00to »

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 feel it’s much more that people on HN are able to evaluate that Kagi is much better than Google, and really want other people to see that. Unfortunately, shitty search results are usually good enough for most people, so it’s hard to justify the switch.

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

#120

Post by EduardoBautista »

Nullabillity wrote: post #85
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

I prefer not having my full search history linked to my personal info and payment details, but that's just me.

I thought the same thing at first. Then I realized Google already has this info about me and more. So I just split up my searches between Google, DDG, and Kagi.
Post reply on HN