Live data from Hacker News

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

blog.google

71–80 of 205 posts

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

#71

My "bar" for how Google does here is how it treats recipe pages. I absolutely loath what SEO has done for recipe pages, because now essentially every recipe page looks exactly the same: 1. Tons and tons of content about the history of the recipe, how humans first domesticated wheat, when the ancient Egyptians first discovered yeast as a leavening agent, etc. etc. 2. Then, after thousands and thousands of words, there…

It's not that hard to solve if you have a "I like this / I hate this" signal from the user.

Unfortunately for Google, G+ was probably their best chance at something like that. Now they just have stuff like time on page to try and figure that out.

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

#73
post #37
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just opened incognito window and entered "brownie recipe"... the first link is to "Love and Lemons" site which seems pretty good - there is a pretty small introduction, but then there is ingredients list, steps, etc.. top 5 links all look pretty good to me. (At least in web design area... I have no ideas if recipes themselves are tasty or not) Maybe it's a regional thing (I am in the US)? Or your profile is messed up…

Just checked out Love and Lemons. Sorry but I can't say it impressed me at all. The vast majority of the page is blogspam garbage. Nobody needs a ten-paragraph introduction and an explanation of why you're using cocoa powder and vanilla in a brownie recipe. Interestingly the first result for "brownie recipe" for me is BBC Food which is about as close to no-BS as you'll find.

Your brownies are probably going to suck. Just because you can't be arsed to read more than two sentences about how to do something doesn't mean others can't.

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

#75

My "bar" for how Google does here is how it treats recipe pages. I absolutely loath what SEO has done for recipe pages, because now essentially every recipe page looks exactly the same: 1. Tons and tons of content about the history of the recipe, how humans first domesticated wheat, when the ancient Egyptians first discovered yeast as a leavening agent, etc. etc. 2. Then, after thousands and thousands of words, there…

It's not that hard to solve if you have a "I like this / I hate this" signal from the user. Unfortunately for Google, G+ was probably their best chance at something like that. Now they just have stuff like time on page to try and figure that out.

No I could just make another bot to rank myself higher.

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

#76
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do they plan to monetize it? How many people will pay for Search? Will they have an ad-supported version? If so how would their direction be any different when they face the same problems?

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.

We don't know if they're profitable doing this. One day, they might go kaput as well.

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

#78

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.

We don't know if they're profitable doing this. One day, they might go kaput as well.

at least they said they are
Post reply on HN