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.
The only thing I would add to your sentence Eurydice is in within the quotes : Google's goal is to deliver the best result for THE USER (and make a profit at the same time).
What I’m seeing in to many threads across the Internet is people assuming “a purity of purpose” on the part of Google. It’s almost if Google is an infallible diety with moral values that somehow supersede anybody else’s and it is magically transferred to the natural results. This concept is further enforced by people arguing that if Google weren’t “pure of purpose” the results would be junk. The fact is though the results change continuously and so what is good, better, or best, is indefinable. The exception is those sites that have conspicuously solidified results.
Bottom line is you have a site that only sells well six months a year and you want to alter that during the slow periods Google may sabotage even your best financial efforts especially in Adwords. Why because Google will always have the better data when all rules on privacy (secrecy) have been thrown out the window. Google’s data will likely verify your site only does well during the mentioned six months so why reward it with good rankings during the slow six months. Many people in these threads applaud that idea I don’t. I like to believe in some concept of “free will” and your ability to alter your final outcome or destiny. Schmidt and Google know that. To disarm you though Google spokespeople present fallacious arguments or misdirection with “if you're not doing anything wrong why should it bother you.” In other words you are evil to desire privacy or secrecy because there is only one definition of it. This is quite astounding rhetoric from a company that wrote the book on business privacy. And again people protect the diety because Google would only do this to protect themselves from all the evil hackers and spammers. Your own desire for privacy is therefore evil because you’re purely up to no good.
I’m not doing anything wrong. But in a broad sense I don’t want Google figuratively going through my dresser drawers to determine if I’ll need new socks at the end of April for their enrichment not mine.
Again though they’re never that smart and they only know what you tell them. Google has already gathered enough data that the opt-outs do them no harm. Google is good. They know what’s best for you. Google doesn’t like money.
"Personalized search results is a big step towards making much of SEO irrelevant."Nothing could be further from the truth. SEO was relatively easy before. Any chucklehead could do it decently. SEO is much more critically important because new elements were thrown into the mix.
Steve these comments are not aimed at you (quite the contrary) but what you said stimulated my brain.
I guess it depends what you mean by SEO. If you mean cheapo link building and so called SEO specialists stuffing keywords then yes they may become irrelevant. I wonder if there are folks here who have found one or two "tricks" that have given them a level of success who are now panicking because those "tricks" will not work.
In a way though nothing has changed you might have been able to trick Google in the past but you could never trick your visitors into thinking you had good content if it was a pile of poo and the same remains with personalisation. In fact good content and a site that encourages users to stay a while and return should now do better.
Having seen what I have seen so far I don't think this is anything to worry about for owners of good sites with good content. If you rely on trickery I'd find a new strategy quick.
Cheers
Sid
I see openings for many purpose led handheld devices to be created. Being better able to distiguish between products, information and advice allows developers to better target their market in the knowledge that the simplest software can now provide an accurate answer.
The user doesn't care about technical SEO. The user does not want to see the page with the most backlinks, the highest keyword density, etc. The user wants to see a page that answers her query.
The search engines (Google, Yahoo, and Bing) are slowly moving towards that by using personalized results, quality rating, location-based results, and so on. These can't be manipulated directly by SEOers.
A successful SEO strategy is now mostly non-technical: good ol' marketing (target audience, messaging, UVP, USP), PR work (public relations, i.e., connections to major print media), quality content (professional writers), and so on.
good ol' marketing
I don't believe that ever did die except amongst those who thought, or hoped, that it would, probably amongst the younger ones during the dot com boom who believed they could do no wrong when loads of money was thrown at them.
We still use all the good ol' marketing techniques except the Net and our sites have become much more refined and focussed. Whereas at one time, especially during the 70s/80s and early 90s we had to attend as many as a dozen international exhibitions on several continents every year, these days we can leave it to a very select 3 at the maximum.
Our web site data, like Google's does to them, almost tells us which products are going to be required for up-and-coming projects when we suddenly have a flurry of requests for specific widgets. Sure, we see the requests but have no idea who is asking them until we are asked to tender, are we so far different from Google?
If you rely on trickery I'd find a new strategy quick.
Absolutely correct, all the answers to do it right are available free of charge here and I predict the same as steveb:
SEO is much more critically important because new elements were thrown into the mix.
Really competent SEOers could suddenly become a very valuable commodity.
Of course they can, and are, and have been.
You need a Google Account to use Web History...Web History uses the information described above to give you a more personalized search experience.
Nowhere does it say that they are doing personalised search even if you don't have a "Google Account". Nor does it tell you how to opt out as promised.
Google has posted a Youtube video which gives a little insight into how they say personalisation will work and explains some of what should be explained in the provacy policy.
[youtube.com...]
Cheers
Sid
[edited by: tedster at 9:25 am (utc) on Jan. 4, 2010]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]
"At Google we're just like a totally laid back bunch of duuuudes, maaan."
You can use the Google Dashboard to pause or disable Web History. Go to [google.com...] and sign in. Scroll to the bottom to see your Web History section. And then you might want to check into the privacy status of any other Google services you are using - also listed on that page.
Another way to access the same process begins when you are signed out. On the top, right, click on Search Settings (wait for it t fade in) and then again on the top, right click on Google Account Settings and sign in. There's also a link for Web History on that page - along with many other services you may be using.
I've had Web History disabled for a long time, and it has never reverted for me.
