Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google Under Siege - Fair or Unfair?

         

Brett_Tabke

8:33 pm on Apr 10, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



The Gmail outcry is huge. The Local search outcry is growing. The number of negative Google stories out there is a surprise.

It seems Google can't please anyone these days.

What is the root of it all?

a) The Florida update?
b) Big - just plain bigness (everyone loves to pick on the big guy)?
c) Poor management?
d) Public relations dept screw up?
e) Competitors planting seeds of division?
f) All of the above?

SyntheticUpper

6:52 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



GoogleGuy,

There is a theme running throughout this thread - and it is one of blatant commercialisation.

It is hard to ignore, and I appreciate it might be difficult for you to deal with.

But I think it needs addressing.

[edited by: SyntheticUpper at 6:53 pm (utc) on April 14, 2004]

Duke51

6:52 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



No, its called moderation. It's kept us out of all sorts of difficulties - you get my drift :)

I get your drift and agree.

IITian

7:05 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



>He said many reporters and shops feel threatened by it. The News section represents complete power over internet news and the ability to set the agenda in Googles favor/image net wide.

Yes, the media Gods are angry. They (NYTimes, LATimes, WashPost, ...) won't rest until G modifies its news to display their spins on top.

More importantly, powerful and rich who relied on ignorance of the masses feel most threatened by internet. In past they knew everything about the masses, now even the masses know a lot about them by diligently researching about them on the internet.

Finally, I believe, that if Google has to survive, it will have to become more like what they want it to become. Otherwise, Google will be constantly attacked by them and we, the sheeple, will follow them.

JudgeJeffries

7:47 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



GoogleGuy,
Youre obviously reading this thread and I would be grateful if you would answer one simple question that will not compromise you or Google in any respect. Assuming that some one from Google actually reads the spam reports why dont you at least deal with those reports instead of merely indicating that you do not want hand to hand spam fighting. If the members here have taken the trouble of writing to you often at your request quoting a particular 'password' why is nothing whatsoever done?

SyntheticUpper

8:17 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



GG wrote:

Let's not turn this into a debate on European values compared to U.S. values or we'll never get back on topic. :)

In all seriousness GG, this *is* important, because your search results, your adverts, your spam filters, etc.etc. are world-wide - they reflect Google's values.

And for the record, I was on topic, it's just that you've highlighted something important.

I've always thought of this as *my* Internet, along with a few billion others.

It's not *your* Internet: neither is it Am*zon's, or EB*ys.

If you f*ck it up, I'll never forgive you; but to my dismay, I think you're already half way there.

With respect.

Ozdachs

8:37 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Google’s results just aren’t as useful as they were.

I don’t subscribe to conspiracy theories, and I don’t mind companies making money and becoming huge and hugely profitable. I don’t expect Google to care if my sites rank high or low.

But, if I am looking for widgets and I find only directories of widgets, hotels in widget city, and passing references of widget makers doing other things, then I am not happy with Google results.

Google fixed something that was not fundamentally broken.

Reading other people’s posts, I see the collateral damage done by Google’s fixes. That damage -- without obvious benefits for searchers -- is enough to fuel a substantial part of any outcry.

The way Google has handled its algorithm change has been an uncomfortable combination of secrecy (normal for G) and self-righteousness (“we are just giving the best results”- “we’re doing no evil”). This stance by an organization with almost monopoly power doesn’t sit well.

I am happy for the people who say that their results are better. That simply has not been my experience as a searcher.

moricante

8:52 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



>we've been experimenting with how to make search and Google better

GoogleGuy.

Your arguments are very superficial. You talk about "experimenting"...:-)))

1. First of all begin with elementar (!) recognition of fonts same colour as background (not even in CSS)
2. THEN start detecting META REFRESH
3. If possible I would experiment with a JavaScript-Emulator, helping you to detect 70% of DWPs
4. Stop cultivating an myth (technical superiority, etc.) that doesn't exist

If you wish, I can send you a 80 MB-List of sites using these primitive techniques and fooling Google's "intelligent technology"...It still works very well GoogleGuy and that is not good for Google. So, stop with myth-marketing and try to fix real existing, elementar problems!

Sincerely, your German Mathematician

moricante

9:04 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



GoogleGuy, please take a look here: [dbpubs.stanford.edu...]

...something very interesting about a method of stopping spam. TrustRank instead of PageRank!

BeeDeeDubbleU

9:14 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



(Evidently, from some of the postings here, Europeans see making money as a bad thing.)

WRONG! Some of us believe that making money at all costs is a bad thing. Especially when it is so obvious to anyone with half a brain and the companies who do this deny it. Since you want to criticise we Europeans let's have a look at what you have given us.

The USA is the only country in the world capable of turning burgers and soft drinks into necessities for kids worldwide, while fully believing that this is acceptable. We don't need them thank you! Take them back. Do you think we are grateful for these things?

Bear with me, this is not off topic. I go on holiday (OK vacation) to places like Greece Spain and Portugal. Until quite recently I used to marvel at the young people there sitting in restaurants relishing fresh fruit, vegetables and green salads, all the stuff I had to plead with my own kids to eat. Now I see them queuing for greasy burgers and frozen fries.

The Internet a couple of years ago was the green salad of computing. All of this new commercialised cr@p is turning it into a greasy burger and I am beginning to suffer from Internet heartburn.

I need to make money but I don't need to rule the world. We don't need another C*ca C*la or M*cD*n*lds. Neither do we need any company to dominate the Internet like you know who dominates personal computing.

Google as a search engine - great! (well used to be and probably could be again.)
Google as an ad laden, privacy invading email provider - hmmm, no thank you!
Google as a hosting company or anything similar - hmmm, no thank you!
Google as an Adwords provider - umm, whatever!
Google as an Adsense seller - whatever!
Google as a directory - waste of time!
Google as a personalized search provider - who cares!
Google web alerts - who cares?
Google as Froogle - what another shopping directory?
Google as a local search - I already largely know who does what in my location!
Google news alerts - I have no time to waste on this. I can buy a paper when I do have the time.

Can a suitable competitor (or two or three or four) please float to the surface - pleeeease? Otherwise the Internet as we now know it is doomed.

GoogleGuy

9:15 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Thanks for the pointer, moricante. I actually read that paper a little while ago. JudgeJeffries, I think several people reported that their feedback was addressed when Brandy came out.
This 245 message thread spans 25 pages: 245