Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Today we're helping people get better search results by extending Personalized Search to signed-out users worldwide
That's a staggering statement meaning that every computer accessing Google is now being personalized, signed in or not, so any desktop, laptop or kiosk will start tracking everything everyone does and you won't be able to access the same search results from any two machines.
The possible impact to all is staggering.
Once there is a better search engine, but there is not. And the only alternative, Bing, has been far more dedicated to personalized search than Google so in the long run they are much worse, even if now they are technologically behind Google in this race into the abyss.
And that, of course, implies getting rid of SEO
Not to mention that people will most likely get worse SERPs -- but others here are fightly that battle more eloquently than I...
....................
Google will harvest and store it, the intelligence agencies will consume it.
True.
However, if people in massess start to migrate to another search provider, Google will either go down in flames or reverse their position and make it opt in.
Either or, the days of Google getting a blank check from the community that is responsible for making them what they are, are over.
Again, don't just talk about it on this board.
Tell your friends, neighbors whoever you can that Google is in fact "Very Evil" and is spying on everything you do.
Most of the average people who use the Internet are not very technical and if a technical person tells them something, they usually believe it. After all, it was us techies telling everybody how great Google was that made them as powerful as they are. Over time, that position can be reversed and Google is making it easier for that to happen because they all live in La La land.
They are intent on controlling everything you see, here or read.
They are "Big Brother" in every sense of the word.
it has to do with Google acting unilaterally to harvest and archive personal information
Yep. They've been doing it for a long time and everybody loves it!
They have no intrinsic right to do that
Then maybe those of us who screamed WOLF back in 2002 were not the bad guys after all? You're a decade too late pal. Google is our overlord now.
However, I do think they're going to face massive problems in the EU. The recent laws about cookies say (paraphrasing):
cookie use has to be opt-in, unless strictly necessary for the provision of a service explicitly requested by the user
This law comes into force across the EU's 27 member states in 2011 (April 26th)
I think the only way they'll be able to make this fly in Europe is by having a Personalized Search button - then the service is explicitly requested by the user. (Then again, I guess one way round this would be to market themselves as a Personalized search engine - therefore that is now the service they provide and the service you are looking for).
Either way, I think the EU will come down on them for this
personalized Google results will help people, but they should be made more aware that everything done online can be tracked...from browsers to cookies to ISP level, etc.
Spot on! I agree that while Google is the best engine out there, they may have made little tiny mistakes here and there, thus not diminishing their value at all. The end user is a fair judge and will always go with the best solutions, Google is king and will continue to be king.
Personally, I don't think the average Joe will care about this
I respectfully disagree. The average joe WILL notice, but I think they'll note the higher quality in relevant results returned. The relevancy will be a prime factor and as people see more and more the topics Google knows they like, they'll be more pleased with the results.
I recall the days when Matt Cutts was here daily
Shame he didn't make more than 32 posts in over 3 years!
kjennings - you joined the forum today and you have done nothing but make positive posts about Google on the most critical threads about Google on these boards since the Florida update. If I wasn't an old cynic I'd think you were a thinly veiled Google PR person. In fact I am an old cynic and I think you are a Google PR person.
Cheers
Sid
Let's stay on topic here now: personalized search is but the most natural way forward, as I stated before. I'll explain, while trying hard not to sound like a google rep.
Here's why: nobody is interested in finding out precisely which site has the most links or relevance. We, as webmasters, might, but the general public does not. People want to hear certain things and they shall hang out where they hear such things the most.
Suppose you're a great Manchester United fan. If you search for Soccer, the number 1 result for you should be MU, not Arsenal. Right? Search is subjective. THAT is where Google is going. Perception is reality.
Thus, a real search engine must present you with what pleases you the most, not what reflects the most voted team. Google is there to please customers, not webmasters. That is the essence of personalized search.
Edit: Type O
Spot on! I agree that while Google is the best engine out there, they may have made little tiny mistakes here and there, thus not diminishing their value at all. The end user is a fair judge and will always go with the best solutions, Google is king and will continue to be king.
Spoken like true Google rep. The intent is way too obvious.
Google may have been King in the past, but Kings have a way of being deposed which is what is going on now within the Webmaster community.
That's why the plex is sending their PR people to the forums that are full of people who actually have enough knowledge and pull to shift the balance. The problem is, it's to late for Gorg PR. The damage has been done.
The shift is happening as we all discuss this and now that the Gorg has made clear their true intentions, people are finally seeing that it's best if we all don't live in Gorg world.
I am responsible for getting a local Jr High Schools computer class to switch their home page to Bing. Now, when those kids tell their parents about the evil gorg, and so on and so forth, it's just a matter of time.
I'm embarrassed to have started the chorus of behind you. But it was rather good fun!
Cheers
Sid
^^)))
G (o o) gle's
___(_)________
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
==========
Watching You!
Please, stay on topic, and not on theories about who works for who.
Back to the discussion: the following relates to this thread, but was sparked by the Marissa Mayer interview [webmasterworld.com]. I had an enlightening conversation with a good friend last night. She listens to my stories of frustration almost daily (I probably bore her to death)...
Details to create context: large US metropolitan area, hectic managerial job at a financial services company, active social life. Brainy, but not a "techie" in any way.
I had asked her to read the Mayer interview following earlier remarks I had made about personalized search. Her comments somewhat stunned me:
(paraphrasing) "Yes, and? It's not something that we didn't see coming. In fact, a lot of my co-workers and peers want this. It's *inescapable* (my emphasis) but what can you do, all of our personal information is already out there so it makes sense that it's being used. You just have to take the good with the bad."
Is the general population (including my friend) already suffering from some sort of Stockholm syndrome when it comes to their privacy and personal freedom? Peer pressure, shiny new gadgets, Patriot A^h^h^h regulations... what exactly caused such a massive sentiment shift so quickly? How can this be fixed?
Makes me feel like I'm some sort of last holdout that needs to "get with the program" in a way, even when it is something I abhor. Is there anybody else who sees the irony in Googling, then downloading "Almost Cut My Hair" from iTunes, listening to it on their Windows box, while reading the lyrics in pdf?
What is an important issue in this thread that seems to be unspoken is SEO fear. G has been anti-SEO virtually from the start, yet most folks here have so far managed to overcome each new obstacle G has placed in the way of good rankings. But it has become more difficult and more time-consuming to rank well. And with personalization results, G can make it MUCH more difficult. SEO becomes more and more marginalized, exactly what G has wanted all along, which causes a lot of SEO fear (as well as anger).
The shift is happening as we all discuss this and now that the Gorg has made clear their true intentions, people are finally seeing that it's best if we all don't live in Gorg world.
So if a shift is happening (or going to happen), where will it take us... Bing?
Out of the frying pan into the fire.
While there is no better option, I think the majority will likely stay with the devil they know.
Cheers
James
Google does not require anyone to log on to provide personalized search for a simple reason: 99% of web users do not ever clean their cookies, so after say 2 or 3 weeks browsing the web Google will have their names, habits, interests, morning medicine, etc.
It's pretty simple really, the profiling technology available at Google(borrowed from law enforcement) allows them to create a precise persona for EACH visitor. If you have facebook or twitter they may even attach a photo and resume to your profile.
So personalized search whether you're logged in or not is the same, it's the best way forward right now and I think it'll take a little time but eventually all of you will just get used to it, adopt it, and we all can move forward creating a web everyone can use with great Google technology. Don't forget to buy your Android phone, those microphones and cameras are GOLD JERRY! Imagine how amazing the offerings will be once ads can be adapted to your voice and the context of your videos taken from your android phone!
Personalized is the way forward, your favorite teams, your favorite stuff right there on your search results!
After more than a decade, it is still amazing that there are folks out there who don't understand what SEO is. It means search engine optimization... whatever the search engine does. If Google personalizes its results, it has exactly zero impact on the desire/need/ability of webmasters to optimize their websites. They just have to do different things than they did before.
There is nothing natural about personalized search, and the incompetence with which Google (and Bing) tries to accomplish it means the results will suffer for it, but it is their search engine. They can crap on it as much as they want, and webmasters then respond by attempting to position themselves favorably in the results.
If you have facebook or twitter they may even attach a photo and resume to your profile. So personalized search whether you're logged in or not is the same, it's the best way forward right now and I think it'll take a little time but eventually all of you will just get used to it, adopt it, and we all can move forward creating a web everyone can use with great Google technology. Don't forget to buy your Android phone, those microphones and cameras are GOLD JERRY! Imagine how amazing the offerings will be once ads can be adapted to your voice and the context of your videos taken from your android phone!
Reading this I feel like I am playing a part in a Sci Fi movie...
Mayer grows defensive when the privacy issue is raised. “Because personalised search is cookie based, there is no personally identifiable information. All we know is that a search came from a certain computer – but nothing about the users’ identity.
The grand fallacy here, of course, is assuming that users and computers are surgically welded to each other.
Suppose you're a great Manchester United fan. If you search for Soccer, the number 1 result for you should be MU, not Arsenal. Right?
I'm not even convinced that's right, no - but even assuming it is, what if the person running the search is actually your cousin, staying for the weekend, who is an Arsenal fan?
particularly the younger people on the net.
eventually all of you will just get used to it, adopt it, and we all can move forward creating a web everyone can use with great Google technology.
Pulled two quotes out of the last few which interest me:
1. The kiddies have been massaged (indoctrinated... that takes about 10 years, just ask some movers and shakers of history) and,
2. What can we do? Must make a living, and please, sir can I have some more?
I've been running a test on 3 of 7 commercial sites since this thread began. Three have robots.txt google disallow. Too soon to tell if that makes a real diff, but can say that conversions have risen, though clicks are down. Expected as to juggernaut nothings to serious lookie-loos. I'm dang curious as to how this works out over the next month.
That said, I, personally, am a private browsing fellow. I teach privacy to my clients, family, and friends. I also do Obama-style begged community gifts of labor for no pay to schools, church groups, and civic entities. All have been exposed to "Bing it for a bingo!" TM
Said it before, say it again, then I quit: G's personalized search is Phorm in sheep's clothing. And that is for G's benefit, not mine, or yours, or even the sheep.
I'm not even convinced that's right, no - but even assuming it is, what if the person running the search is actually your cousin, staying for the weekend, who is an Arsenal fan?
Well then they will have to click on the number 2 listing (or wherever Arsenal are mentioned in the SERPs). Alternatively, if they have a Google account, then can log in and get their own personalised results.
What if a guy's wife does a search for Las Vegas strip rooms, and gets a lot of zebra club and spearmint rhino results?
Google has an absurd one-person, one-computer vision of the world based on the fact that they are all rich. In the real world, most humans don't want their web searches skewed toward the teenage male in the house.
most humans don't want their web searches skewed toward the teenage male in the house
this phrase should spear-head the switch-to-Bing campaign.
sums it all up in a neat little package.
