391–400 of 551 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How might you see solving this problem? How could we distribute the task or goal of curation amongst individuals? How do we incentivize and enable discovery of maven/curators?
> How might you see solving this problem? Break up google, disentangle AdSense from Search. Then the search division doesn't have incentives anymore to prioritize websites based on AdSense presence.
"Hey there, fellow political enthusiasts and furry friend lovers! We're Alex and Taylor, and we're on a mission..." This really made me smile. It's one of the stupid phrases used in all of these types of sites that bothers me to no end. Iliza Shlesinger has a bit about two sisters doing a pitch to Shark Tank, and I read that whole "post" in the voice she uses. I always thought it was just me and my curmudgeon ways, b…
I routinely speak with said creator of website). I have let him know this thread is here to appreciate the wide conversation on here. I do genuinely love that I write 13,000 words on issues with AI on the site to little response. But some of the more silly stuff like this is the higher traction stuff on the site. Just glad to see said author is getting the attention he deserves.
So when things not related to AI are posted, it stands out and gains traction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Webrings were a lot of people doing work for free or with little return. Nobody has time to do this anymore, and the only way to support such project would be paid membership (hard to gain traction) or ads (back to square one). Sorry that I sound pessimistic but I just am.
>> Nobody has time to do this anymore By every measure don't people have more time than ever before? I think it's more a dramatic shift in how people use & view the internet. The (unfortunate in a lot of ways) answer is probably create something new and exclusive, but universal enough for the target audience that's going to do all the work to align incentives, try to pull along the good and leave behind the bad. Ther…
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…
Google be like: this website performs well on the ranking, does it have AdSense, no, downrank.
Sick.
Disclosure - I was so pissed by the degration of quality (an money-thirstiness) of the search results from Google that I switched to a non-profit search engine as my default for both desktop and mobile. The daily search experience doesn't have much noticible change to me. I do admit sometimes the Google search result could be better sometimes, but those occasions are quite rare for my needs, like maybe once a week.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Having only one ad network means that the monopolist holds all the cards. They can extract huge margins from advertisers while passing on very little to websites. And they can make all the rules. Websites have to comply no questions asked. If the monopolist closes your account it may be the end of the road for your business. That said, Google is not actually a monopolist in online advertising. There's also Facebook,…
But that's not the real complaint here. The real complaint is that Google did not consider the original site to be "ad supplier worthy".
As you say, there are other advertising players - but if none of them see value (in the original site) then maybe that's telling us something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean? The logical thing is $. That's it. Nothing hidden here. Google knows how many times it sends people there. I can't imagine that it's any significant numbers in Google terms of numbers. The author says it "gets a steady stream of traffic", but no definition of what that actually means. It's probably a rounding number of a rounding number to Googs. With that in mind, yeah, it's not worth it to Googs e…
If a simple useful site already gets a high percentage of clicks from Google Searches for its functionality, and wants to show ads, that’s $. Right? Why would PageRank rate a site highly, and funnnel people to it, while Adsense doesn’t want to monetize it? I can’t come up with a sensible reason. All I can think is Adsense is becoming so gamey, so sophisticated at monetizing spam and low quality content, that they are…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Decentralized communication absolutely works, and we have plenty of decentralized tools now. Decentralized search is a legitimately hard problem, both because it needs strong protocols (which are getting there but still WIP) and user adoption (which isn't really happening).
Ask an email administrator how well decentralization works at scale. It should be concerning that email has re-centralized to deal with all the problems that come from federation and decentralization.
50 year old decentralized protocol has problems, so decentralized protocols can't possible work. Just like 50 year old computer can't play doom, so doom doesn't exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
A calculator sounds like a pretty good place to advertise actually. Any tool where a user spends a lot of time instead of rapidly scrolling through it could be decent ad space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For queries like that I now turn to Gemini / ChatGPT first. Of course, this is only a good idea if I have some way of sanity checking the answer. If I doubt the answer I get back I try Google search instead.
You can ask a model to provided an analysis of its answer including a probability that it is correct as part of the prompt, helps with doublechecking a lot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Decentralized communication absolutely works, and we have plenty of decentralized tools now. Decentralized search is a legitimately hard problem, both because it needs strong protocols (which are getting there but still WIP) and user adoption (which isn't really happening).
Ask an email administrator how well decentralization works at scale. It should be concerning that email has re-centralized to deal with all the problems that come from federation and decentralization.
As someone who administrates their own email server and works at an SMB who administrates their own email servers, it works quite well and doesn’t require centralization.