6 ms·

I really would like to see Google penalize websites that force you to login after google showed these websites in the results. 1. Take Linkedin for example: yo

I really would like to see Google penalize websites that force you to login after google showed these websites in the results. 1. Take Linkedin for example: you search for a person on google; google shows a linkedin result; you go to linkedin but you are greeted with giant popup asking you to login to view info. Ridiculous. 2. Same with Quora: they come in results with basic info, but when you go to their page, they forward you to registration/login page. These practices are not ok in my book. Surely, they can do whatever they want on their websites but if Google indexes you and shows some info in search results, then you better show that info on your page without forcing me to register. PS: To be clear -- this behavior happens on mobile version of their websites. Not sure how it plays out on desktop.

jakubp 10y ago
Unfortunately the info typically is on that page, just not complete - and you want more and Google knows it's the way to that information, so results are largely correct, no? If those sites show something else to you than they show to Google Bot, that's against Google's policy and they should be penalized, so I'm assuming they aren't. If energy required to get to the information you need through that path is too much (i.e. lots of people bounce on that page), that will again, generally, result in putting it lower in search results. So either most people agree on putting up with the login page (or are logged in already), or some other factors which I assume you'd like to discount keep those pages so high.
- Smirnoff 10y ago
  Let's take a look at Quora's case. Please do the following: 1. Open your mobile browser. 2. Ask a question on Google and add "quora" so you get some results. 3. Open Quora's result link 4. See that result for a brief second and 5. Be forwarded to registration page, which doesn't have any close or cancel out buttons. 6. Try tapping back and you are back to Google results 7. Curse at Quora and never tap on their results again. That last point is only for me. There is a choice to register. You are free to choose. PS: You are right, the information that Google showed/indexed is there on Quora. But for regular people (not Google bots), it's there for a second. IDK about you but I'd place this behavior into dark pattern UX book. PPS: For people, who don't believe this behavior, you can see the video of my experience on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiOMwRwXLcg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiOMwRwXLcg
  - mulmen 10y ago
    For a short(?) but wonderful period of time it was possible to blacklist sites from your Google search results. As I recall Google moved this functionality into the Chrome browser several years ago. When it was still available as an account setting I used it to filter out the awful "resources" like expertsexchange and that one Oracle consultant site with the hilarious pictures. When I see Quora results I long for that feature to be returned.
    - lorenzhs 10y ago
      There's a chrome extension for that now, it's called "Personal Blocklist" iirc. There might be something similar for other browsers.
    - jjgreen 10y ago
      Do you have a link for the Oracle consultant site? I'm intrigued ..
      - Spooky23 10y ago
        This is the one that comes to mind. http://www.dba-oracle.com/ http://www.dba-oracle.com/
        throwaway1892 10y ago
        I remember that one because of the offer to learn Oracle during a cruise, complete with the important part "Convince the boss" : http://www.dba-oracle.com/BC_cruise.htm http://www.dba-oracle.com/BC_cruise.htm
        Spooky23 10y ago
        Unfortunately, the thing that stuck in my head was "redneck philosophy". http://www.dba-oracle.com/redneck.htm http://www.dba-oracle.com/redneck.htm
edwinyzh 10y ago
Totally agree! Those kinds of behavior waste time of visitors - when the info is protected by a login, it shouldn't be indexed by search engines in the first place.
HNSucksAss 10y ago
Google is supposed to be penalizing sites that aren't mobile-friendly. So why aren't they burying sites that DISABLE ZOOMING? There's no excuse for disabling crucial browser functionality that has been standard for almost a decade. Oh wait: That's because Google is a bunch of hypocrites. They disable zooming on THEIR OWN MOBILE SITES, making them distinctly mobile-UNFRIENDLY.
visarga 10y ago
Elsevier, who indexes the text of the article in Google but requires $35 to show it to visitors.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  Sci-hub
cygned 10y ago
Pinterest is even worse - in Google Images, images are listed but once you enter the site, you're blocked from accessing whatever you have been looking for.
- dazc 10y ago
  I also think Google should do a better job of promoting the original source of the image, since the originator is unlikely to ever get credit.
  - JTxt 10y ago
    Yes, or at least also point to what it believes is the source. "Original copy. Corrections?" or something. Sometimes the original may not be able to handle the traffic.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  What's even worse about Pinterest is that almost all the images are derived from an outside source, so you're following this insane route to get at the original content: source image-> indexed by Pinterest -> Google index of Pinterest index -> Pinterest page -> source image. I can't believe that Google is incapable of navigating around this, but Pinterest would probably block them from indexing if they did.
  - frandroid 10y ago
    Pinterest would be foolish to block indexing by Google, though.
    - alphonsegaston 10y ago
      Yeah, I would think so too, but if you spend any time with their apps, you can see how user hostile they are. The UI is awful, data is incredibly difficult to export. They really want to lock you into their narrow channels.
- athenot 10y ago
alphonsegaston 10y ago
I frequently have to delete these kinds of HTML nodes off the page just to see if it actually has something I want. I debated rolling my own extension for the common sites where I run into this, but ended up just throwing up my hands at the absurdity of the situation.
- NoGravitas 10y ago
  It might be worth maintaining a cosmetic blocking list for uBlock that you could share and that others could contribute to.
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    That's a great idea! Completely forgot uBlock had this feature: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker
- nommm-nommm 10y ago
  I just hit CTRL-U to read the pages source which contains the text content. Now that I think about it I wonder if reader mode would work. Hey, maybe you can just set your user agent to Google Bot.
  - yellowapple 10y ago
    Reader Mode is invaluable for sites that use Javascript to throw up paywalls when you're in the middle of reading something (Wired does this, last I checked). Sometimes you have to refresh the page for it to fully work, but once you do, the full text is right there, in a format that's much nicer than the original could ever strive to be.
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    Yeah I do this too for text stuff. I'm an artist, so I'm often times looking for images though.
- squarefoot 10y ago
hising 10y ago
That is cloaking in my book - Video on Matt Cutts explaining Cloaking - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHtnfOgp65Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHtnfOgp65Q

jakubp 10y ago

Unfortunately the info typically is on that page, just not complete - and you want more and Google knows it's the way to that information, so results are largely correct, no? If those sites show something else to you than they show to Google Bot, that's against Google's policy and they should be penalized, so I'm assuming they aren't. If energy required to get to the information you need through that path is too much (i.e. lots of people bounce on that page), that will again, generally, result in putting it lower in search results. So either most people agree on putting up with the login page (or are logged in already), or some other factors which I assume you'd like to discount keep those pages so high.

Smirnoff 10y ago
Let's take a look at Quora's case. Please do the following: 1. Open your mobile browser. 2. Ask a question on Google and add "quora" so you get some results. 3. Open Quora's result link 4. See that result for a brief second and 5. Be forwarded to registration page, which doesn't have any close or cancel out buttons. 6. Try tapping back and you are back to Google results 7. Curse at Quora and never tap on their results again. That last point is only for me. There is a choice to register. You are free to choose. PS: You are right, the information that Google showed/indexed is there on Quora. But for regular people (not Google bots), it's there for a second. IDK about you but I'd place this behavior into dark pattern UX book. PPS: For people, who don't believe this behavior, you can see the video of my experience on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiOMwRwXLcg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiOMwRwXLcg
- mulmen 10y ago
  For a short(?) but wonderful period of time it was possible to blacklist sites from your Google search results. As I recall Google moved this functionality into the Chrome browser several years ago. When it was still available as an account setting I used it to filter out the awful "resources" like expertsexchange and that one Oracle consultant site with the hilarious pictures. When I see Quora results I long for that feature to be returned.
  - lorenzhs 10y ago
    There's a chrome extension for that now, it's called "Personal Blocklist" iirc. There might be something similar for other browsers.
  - jjgreen 10y ago
    Do you have a link for the Oracle consultant site? I'm intrigued ..
    - Spooky23 10y ago
      This is the one that comes to mind. http://www.dba-oracle.com/ http://www.dba-oracle.com/
      - throwaway1892 10y ago
        I remember that one because of the offer to learn Oracle during a cruise, complete with the important part "Convince the boss" : http://www.dba-oracle.com/BC_cruise.htm http://www.dba-oracle.com/BC_cruise.htm
        Spooky23 10y ago
        Unfortunately, the thing that stuck in my head was "redneck philosophy". http://www.dba-oracle.com/redneck.htm http://www.dba-oracle.com/redneck.htm

edwinyzh 10y ago

Totally agree! Those kinds of behavior waste time of visitors - when the info is protected by a login, it shouldn't be indexed by search engines in the first place.

HNSucksAss 10y ago

Google is supposed to be penalizing sites that aren't mobile-friendly. So why aren't they burying sites that DISABLE ZOOMING? There's no excuse for disabling crucial browser functionality that has been standard for almost a decade. Oh wait: That's because Google is a bunch of hypocrites. They disable zooming on THEIR OWN MOBILE SITES, making them distinctly mobile-UNFRIENDLY.

visarga 10y ago

Elsevier, who indexes the text of the article in Google but requires $35 to show it to visitors.

dredmorbius 10y ago
Sci-hub

cygned 10y ago

Pinterest is even worse - in Google Images, images are listed but once you enter the site, you're blocked from accessing whatever you have been looking for.

dazc 10y ago
I also think Google should do a better job of promoting the original source of the image, since the originator is unlikely to ever get credit.
- JTxt 10y ago
  Yes, or at least also point to what it believes is the source. "Original copy. Corrections?" or something. Sometimes the original may not be able to handle the traffic.
alphonsegaston 10y ago
What's even worse about Pinterest is that almost all the images are derived from an outside source, so you're following this insane route to get at the original content: source image-> indexed by Pinterest -> Google index of Pinterest index -> Pinterest page -> source image. I can't believe that Google is incapable of navigating around this, but Pinterest would probably block them from indexing if they did.
- frandroid 10y ago
  Pinterest would be foolish to block indexing by Google, though.
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    Yeah, I would think so too, but if you spend any time with their apps, you can see how user hostile they are. The UI is awful, data is incredibly difficult to export. They really want to lock you into their narrow channels.
athenot 10y ago

alphonsegaston 10y ago

I frequently have to delete these kinds of HTML nodes off the page just to see if it actually has something I want. I debated rolling my own extension for the common sites where I run into this, but ended up just throwing up my hands at the absurdity of the situation.

NoGravitas 10y ago
It might be worth maintaining a cosmetic blocking list for uBlock that you could share and that others could contribute to.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  That's a great idea! Completely forgot uBlock had this feature: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker
nommm-nommm 10y ago
I just hit CTRL-U to read the pages source which contains the text content. Now that I think about it I wonder if reader mode would work. Hey, maybe you can just set your user agent to Google Bot.
- yellowapple 10y ago
  Reader Mode is invaluable for sites that use Javascript to throw up paywalls when you're in the middle of reading something (Wired does this, last I checked). Sometimes you have to refresh the page for it to fully work, but once you do, the full text is right there, in a format that's much nicer than the original could ever strive to be.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  Yeah I do this too for text stuff. I'm an artist, so I'm often times looking for images though.
squarefoot 10y ago

hising 10y ago

That is cloaking in my book - Video on Matt Cutts explaining Cloaking - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHtnfOgp65Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHtnfOgp65Q