3 ms·

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=307%2D139%2D2345 https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=307%2D139%2D2345 You comment now comes up first, but the rest of t

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=307%2D139%2D2345 https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=307%2D139%2D2345 You comment now comes up first, but the rest of the results all try to contact googlesyndication.com, so ads? Google will not exclude sites that literally give them money.

snazz 8y ago
It’s the only result I get for this search now. The ads are low-quality if I disable my adblocker however.
yeahitslikethat 8y ago
I've been saying this is inevitable for a long time. If you don't have Google ads they won't show you. YouTube ranks no ad vids lower. Google is converting the world into a content production factory FOR Google and they pay literally pennies for the work. If even pennies. Consider how much content Google search now includes from Web pages where you don't even need to click into the page. Weather. Answers to questions. Some links I click keep google.Com in the url and Google processes the page and shows me what Google wants. I don't even know anymore how much of what I see is what the creator wanted me too see our what Google wants me to see our not see. Imagine they remove competitors ads with that. Who knows what they do in the name of making the Web better. You can't go public, answer to no one accountable, who only thinks of MONEY and do no evil. If Google wants to do no MORE evil. Take yourself private and live up to your credo.
ma2rten 8y ago
I work on AdSense at Google. We need to crawl all the pages that serve our ads so that we can show ads that are relevant. We actually store those crawl results in a different place than search to prevent exactly that problem. We could probably save a lot of money if we consolidated those indices, but we don't do that prevent biasing search results. As a result a large percentage of pages that show Google Ads are not in the search index. If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue? EDIT: I realize I needed to explain this statement a little bit more. If we show ads on google.com we get 100% of the revenue. If show ads on reversephonelookup.it they get majority of the revenue. There is a limited amount of advertiser demand. Instead of manipulating the organic search results, it would be more profitable for google to just show more ads on the search page or inflate the ad price or something.
- WaltPurvis 8y ago
  > If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue? Can you explain this? Not sure if it's your phrasing or what, but I'm not getting what you mean.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- rvnx 8y ago
  Because if you show artificially irrelevant results too often (by biasing search results to prioritise AdSense pages), then users would stop using Google Search at some point. Eventually you would loose the revenues coming from the SERP, which are 10 times higher than AdSense :) Would you risk loosing 10, to get 1 ?
  - ma2rten 8y ago
    Let's say the search index is size N and the AdSense index is size M. If we were to join them, we would save the storage space for pages that are in both indices. Also, the search index would gain all the sites that are in the AdSense index so search results would potentially improve. However, it would give an unfair advantage to google publishers.
- rhizome 8y ago
  If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue? I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to open this can of worms, did it have something else printed on its label? Phone number lookup sites are almost certainly a) easily detectable; and b) low traffic. If Google only gets a percentage cut of this, why index them for fractions of pennies per year?
  - ma2rten 8y ago
    There may be cases where we drop low traffic sites from our index, which is separate from the search index. I don't how much of that is public information, so can't go into detail.

snazz 8y ago

It’s the only result I get for this search now. The ads are low-quality if I disable my adblocker however.

yeahitslikethat 8y ago

I've been saying this is inevitable for a long time. If you don't have Google ads they won't show you. YouTube ranks no ad vids lower. Google is converting the world into a content production factory FOR Google and they pay literally pennies for the work. If even pennies. Consider how much content Google search now includes from Web pages where you don't even need to click into the page. Weather. Answers to questions. Some links I click keep google.Com in the url and Google processes the page and shows me what Google wants. I don't even know anymore how much of what I see is what the creator wanted me too see our what Google wants me to see our not see. Imagine they remove competitors ads with that. Who knows what they do in the name of making the Web better. You can't go public, answer to no one accountable, who only thinks of MONEY and do no evil. If Google wants to do no MORE evil. Take yourself private and live up to your credo.

ma2rten 8y ago

I work on AdSense at Google. We need to crawl all the pages that serve our ads so that we can show ads that are relevant. We actually store those crawl results in a different place than search to prevent exactly that problem. We could probably save a lot of money if we consolidated those indices, but we don't do that prevent biasing search results. As a result a large percentage of pages that show Google Ads are not in the search index. If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue? EDIT: I realize I needed to explain this statement a little bit more. If we show ads on google.com we get 100% of the revenue. If show ads on reversephonelookup.it they get majority of the revenue. There is a limited amount of advertiser demand. Instead of manipulating the organic search results, it would be more profitable for google to just show more ads on the search page or inflate the ad price or something.

WaltPurvis 8y ago
> If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue? Can you explain this? Not sure if it's your phrasing or what, but I'm not getting what you mean.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
rvnx 8y ago
Because if you show artificially irrelevant results too often (by biasing search results to prioritise AdSense pages), then users would stop using Google Search at some point. Eventually you would loose the revenues coming from the SERP, which are 10 times higher than AdSense :) Would you risk loosing 10, to get 1 ?
- ma2rten 8y ago
  Let's say the search index is size N and the AdSense index is size M. If we were to join them, we would save the storage space for pages that are in both indices. Also, the search index would gain all the sites that are in the AdSense index so search results would potentially improve. However, it would give an unfair advantage to google publishers.
rhizome 8y ago
If Google was so evil, why would we purposefully send traffic to sites where we only get a percentage cut of the revenue? I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to open this can of worms, did it have something else printed on its label? Phone number lookup sites are almost certainly a) easily detectable; and b) low traffic. If Google only gets a percentage cut of this, why index them for fractions of pennies per year?
- ma2rten 8y ago
  There may be cases where we drop low traffic sites from our index, which is separate from the search index. I don't how much of that is public information, so can't go into detail.