|
Post by Morreion on Feb 22, 2011 10:17:33 GMT -5
The Dirty Little Secrets of Search (New York Times)Despite the cowboy outlaw connotations, black-hat services are not illegal, but trafficking in them risks the wrath of Google. The company draws a pretty thick line between techniques it considers deceptive and “white hat” approaches, which are offered by hundreds of consulting firms and are legitimate ways to increase a site’s visibility. Penney’s results were derived from methods on the wrong side of that line, says Mr. Pierce. He described the optimization as the most ambitious attempt to game Google’s search results that he has ever seen.
“Actually, it’s the most ambitious attempt I’ve ever heard of,” he said. “This whole thing just blew me away. Especially for such a major brand. You’d think they would have people around them that would know better.” A fascinating article- there is a lot of money at stake getting near the top of a Google search result. Some companies that have been building up their Google page rank in a shady manner have been pushed back down the list or even temporarily banned from searches. The question arises later in the article- does amount of advertising spent affect your treatment in a Google search? There are lots of factors that go into a simple internet search. Check out the interview with a black hat corporate search booster- they literally hide so that Google doesn't block them from their search results.
|
|
|
Post by Regolyth on Feb 22, 2011 12:42:12 GMT -5
Wow, that was a really long article. Very interesting too. I'm really glad Google does something to try and deter stuff like this.
|
|
|
Post by Morreion on Feb 22, 2011 14:56:04 GMT -5
But, think about it...do you trust Google to do the right thing with all of the money they are making from such advertisers? This is very complicated.
|
|
|
Post by Regolyth on Feb 23, 2011 9:55:37 GMT -5
Actually, I do. I have a lot of faith in Google. I like their products, their ethics, and other things they do. I've always been a big supporter of Google. I mean, after all, they're eventually going to take over the world anyways. ;D But seriously, I do trust them to make these kinds of decisions. They haven't done anything to dissuade me otherwise, so I'm cool with it. And in the end, it is their website, their company. They can run it how they want. We don't have to use their products.
|
|
|
Post by Morreion on Feb 23, 2011 10:32:51 GMT -5
Oh, they definitely can run it however they like. It's just another thing to keep in mind. I like Google too, but be careful: Google, Conn. AG Agree That Google Sniffed Wi-Fi Data (PC Mag)In collecting photos used for its Street View feature of Google Maps, the cars used to photograph street-level scenes also "sniffed" unsecured personal and business data that was broadcasting at the time, via routers built into the vehicles.
That data collection has become a significant black eye for Google, with South Korea becoming the latest country to investigate the breach.
|
|
|
Post by Regolyth on Feb 24, 2011 9:29:46 GMT -5
Okay, that one upsets me a bit. It's a bit uncalled for, to do that. Why would they even do that?
|
|
|
Post by Morreion on Feb 24, 2011 13:39:45 GMT -5
Yeah, that's very fishy. Information is power...power corrupts...and so on. Heh
|
|