4 ms·

Microsoft uses behaviour I doubt they are only targeting Google. But I completely agree, the data is not being mined from Google, it's a relationship for searc

by dekz 16y ago

Microsoft uses behaviour I doubt they are only targeting Google. But I completely agree, the data is not being mined from Google, it's a relationship for search term a to page b created by the user, not stolen from Google.

moultano 16y ago
Google is the one creating the association, not the user. The relationship between term a and page b was created by Google, and confirmed by a user. People don't click on search results that aren't there.
- stanleydrew 16y ago
  This is the most important comment I've read so far on this issue. What everything comes down to is whether user generated associations between searches and results via clicks are fair game as a signal. As this comment points out, there is a decent argument that searchers on Google or other engines aren't the ones creating the associations, and therefore perhaps Bing has no right to use that data.
- evgen 16y ago
  Google is not creating the association. Users are creating the associations, Google is discovering them and presenting them back to other users, and subsequent users are confirming the associations. In this case Google engineers, masquerading as users, created associations, then Google presented those associations back to the user, and Bing noticed the association between the term and the page. The relationship between a term and a page was not created by Google, it was created by users. Google just indexes everything and makes note of these associations, but its does not create the link in the first place.
  - moultano 16y ago
    Users are creating the associations, Google is discovering them and presenting them back to other users, and subsequent users are confirming the associations. Going down this road of debate, we'll be getting into the semantics of "inventing" vs. "discovering." Turning data into ranking is the whole purpose of a search engine, just as turning data into theory is the purpose of science, and turning experience into art is the purpose of art. Essentially here, we're debating whether search ranking is more like science, in which there's a correct answer that you are uncovering, or like art, in which all of the product is subjective. Having worked in the field for five years, I'd argue that it is far closer to art than science. Google's rankings are its subjective determination, and the courts have agreed that Google's rankings are its constitutionally protected speech. Though the data may all ultimately come from the human-created internet, the transformation of that data is still important, and subjective. To claim otherwise is to miss the whole point of search technology in the first place.

by dekz 16y ago

moultano 16y ago

Google is the one creating the association, not the user. The relationship between term a and page b was created by Google, and confirmed by a user. People don't click on search results that aren't there.

stanleydrew 16y ago
This is the most important comment I've read so far on this issue. What everything comes down to is whether user generated associations between searches and results via clicks are fair game as a signal. As this comment points out, there is a decent argument that searchers on Google or other engines aren't the ones creating the associations, and therefore perhaps Bing has no right to use that data.
evgen 16y ago
Google is not creating the association. Users are creating the associations, Google is discovering them and presenting them back to other users, and subsequent users are confirming the associations. In this case Google engineers, masquerading as users, created associations, then Google presented those associations back to the user, and Bing noticed the association between the term and the page. The relationship between a term and a page was not created by Google, it was created by users. Google just indexes everything and makes note of these associations, but its does not create the link in the first place.
- moultano 16y ago
  Users are creating the associations, Google is discovering them and presenting them back to other users, and subsequent users are confirming the associations. Going down this road of debate, we'll be getting into the semantics of "inventing" vs. "discovering." Turning data into ranking is the whole purpose of a search engine, just as turning data into theory is the purpose of science, and turning experience into art is the purpose of art. Essentially here, we're debating whether search ranking is more like science, in which there's a correct answer that you are uncovering, or like art, in which all of the product is subjective. Having worked in the field for five years, I'd argue that it is far closer to art than science. Google's rankings are its subjective determination, and the courts have agreed that Google's rankings are its constitutionally protected speech. Though the data may all ultimately come from the human-created internet, the transformation of that data is still important, and subjective. To claim otherwise is to miss the whole point of search technology in the first place.