How Google is Killing Organic Search • Hacker News Board

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#211

Post by acdha » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 2:50 AM UTC

yaddayadda wrote: post #89

api wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found DDG to be better at finding obscure content, and the Goog to be better at finding what I call "canonical" content. For example, if I search for "binary tree" I probably want Wikipedia followed maybe by StackExchange. Google does that, while DDG sends me deep into the netherworld.

One awesome thing about DDG is their !bang searches. It won't automate an unknown search, but if you know the first thing you're going to want is the Wikipedia entry you just search ["binary tree" !w]; for related StackExchange questions ["binary tree" !so]; you can even do a straight goggle search ["binary tree" !g]. For the available !bangs check out - https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html

If I already know where I'm going, why involve a third-party?

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#212

Post by acdha » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 2:56 AM UTC

corresation wrote: post #141

jcampbell1 wrote: post #22

The auction model for ads basically ruins internet searches in transactional categories. If you want to win at the "italian restaurant" search game, you have to bid the highest for the ad, which means you must have the highest margin. The best way to win is to open a restaurant with ridiculously high margins (over priced wine and cheap ingredients). Want the "cheapest car insurance"? Google is zero help. It sends you…

The best way to win is to open a restaurant with ridiculously high margins (over priced wine and cheap ingredients). That's a rather terrible example: a restaurant that had over priced wine and cheap ingredients would fail miserably in short order, regardless of how many Google ad auctions they won. If you really want the cheapest car insurance, you need to find a company that doesn't advertise, and is non-profit I d…

> That's a rather terrible example: a restaurant that had over priced wine and cheap ingredients would fail miserably in short order

Have you ever travelled? There are restaurants like that surrounding every airport, convention center, etc. because they know people will value convenience, speed of service, ability to handle large parties, etc. more than great food. The situation is similar near large office parks — it may be mediocre but it's the closest choice! — areas with lots of tourists or transient populations (how many college town date-night restaurants are great?), etc.

Actually, it's even simpler: Applebee's does not appear to be disappearing.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#213

Post by krichman » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 3:09 AM UTC

corresation wrote: post #143

narrator wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's funny is how different using Consumer Reports online experience is. What? There's no free content? I have to pay a monthly fee to read content and it's not trivial. Best investment I ever made. Especially when buying new appliances. Ha.. It's kind of pathetic that I flinched at spending a few bucks a month for good content. If you're getting information for free your information likely has a cost you're just p…

Best investment I ever made. Especially when buying new appliances. Ha.. It's kind of pathetic that I flinched at spending a few bucks a month for good content. I have an entirely different perspective of Consumer Reports (the online variant which has external site ads on it). Understand that they are entirely biased (as we all are): They take home the lucre by keeping you thinking that you need them, and that they'r…

Since you tried to cancel and it was difficult to find how, can't you issue a chargeback at that point?

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#214

Post by i_need_sources » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 9:32 AM UTC

Alex3917 wrote: post #169

mkopinsky wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a comparable number for non-profit colleges? While I doubt it's 2.9, I'm sure it's still high.

Non-profit 4-year colleges actually spend more on instruction than on those other categories, by 1.1x.

yeah, I'm going to have to ask you for a citation there.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#215

Post by pizu » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 2:24 PM UTC

And this is a further proof: https://www.google.co.uk/flights

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#216

Post by yaddayadda » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 3:22 PM UTC

acdha wrote: post #211

yaddayadda wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One awesome thing about DDG is their !bang searches. It won't automate an unknown search, but if you know the first thing you're going to want is the Wikipedia entry you just search ["binary tree" !w]; for related StackExchange questions ["binary tree" !so]; you can even do a straight goggle search ["binary tree" !g]. For the available !bangs check out - https://duckduckgo.com/bang.html

If I already know where I'm going, why involve a third-party?

I have my Firefox url bar set to DDG, so it's way faster for me to:

1. type ["binary tree" !w] in the url bar

than it is to:

1. type [wikipedia] in the url bar (I don't even know if it's a com or org, but DDG would be fine with just [wikipedia]. If I knew whether it was com or org, then I could skip the next step.)

2. click the wikipedia link in the now displayed DDG results

3. find the field to enter the site-specific search terms (for many -- but not all -- it's in the upper right corner)

4. type ["binary tree"] in the site-specific search box

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#217

Post by Alex3917 » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 3:57 PM UTC

i_need_sources wrote: post #214

Alex3917 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-profit 4-year colleges actually spend more on instruction than on those other categories, by 1.1x.

yeah, I'm going to have to ask you for a citation there.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2012045

Table A-43-2

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#218

Post by acdha » Wed, Jul 03, 2013, 4:28 PM UTC

yaddayadda wrote: post #216

acdha wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I already know where I'm going, why involve a third-party?

I have my Firefox url bar set to DDG, so it's way faster for me to: 1. type ["binary tree" !w] in the url bar than it is to: 1. type [wikipedia] in the url bar (I don't even know if it's a com or org, but DDG would be fine with just [wikipedia]. If I knew whether it was com or org, then I could skip the next step.) 2. click the wikipedia link in the now displayed DDG results 3. find the field to enter the site-specif…

In Chrome, that's:

1. Start to type wikipedia 2. Hit tab as soon as wikipedia.org is the first choice 3. Start typing the query and note that the suggestions are coming from Wikipedia, not google

Significantly faster than waiting several seconds for DDG to redirect

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#219

Post by jasey » Thu, Jul 04, 2013, 12:13 AM UTC

oceanstone wrote: post #8

There is a way to increase the percentage of organic search results on a Google page, with relative ease. Just scroll down.

If you have ever looked at a heatmap of where users scroll down to on a given page. It will clearly show you that the prime realestate is above the fold (before you start scrolling)

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#220

Post by tomkarlo » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:48 PM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #208

tomkarlo wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you provided initial payment using the credit card account, but you signed up for the service until you cancel it, not until your method of payment expires. Even if you cancelled the card outright, you're generally technically (and legally) still on the hook for a subscription if you don't go and cancel. Read the ToS for just about any recurring subscription. It's your obligation to cancel, not their obligation t…

> you signed up for the service until you cancel it // Maybe, that would depend on the legal terms under which you signed up. Mostly you sign up and pay for a fixed term. So contractually the expectation is that you don't continue payment. If legally the payment is due, then that's still doesn't mean you can have authorised it on a card beyond the expiry date. Moreover you haven't authorised the payment with the new…

Hardly anyone offers a subscription service without an automatic renewal of some type. It's counter to the entire business model, which is that you spend once to acquire a customer but then earn back multiple subscription cycles from them (as the first cycle almost never pays back the cost of acquisition.)

Look at the Amazon Prime TOS, in all-caps: "UNLESS YOU NOTIFY US BEFORE A CHARGE THAT YOU WANT TO CANCEL OR DO NOT WANT TO AUTO RENEW, YOU UNDERSTAND YOUR PRIME MEMBERSHIP WILL AUTOMATICALLY CONTINUE AND YOU AUTHORIZE US (WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU, UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW) TO COLLECT THE THEN-APPLICABLE MEMBERSHIP FEE AND ANY TAXES, USING ANY CREDIT CARD WE HAVE ON RECORD FOR YOU."

I'm guessing that their definition of "CREDIT CARD" is wide enough that they can roll the expiration date; when your card expiresd at Amazon you can just update the date without entering a "new card" - they consider the new physical card to be the same "payment method."