3 ms·

> but Google defends it because their data "tells them" it's optimal. C'mon, I'm not one to usually come rushing to Google's aid, but from Matt Cutts' comments

• mkramlich 16y ago
  I understand. However, I've seen public comment by Google folks that basically conveyed the idea that it was optimal -- by certain standards. Granted, they have many people and opinions can differ and vary over time. Secondly, it should be possible to do something as simple as filter out obvious content farm sites in under a week tops. Or give all users a quick and easy to do it. Perhaps have a default blacklist of known content farmers, and then give users the option to remove things from the blacklist when doing their own searches. You might be dealing with a huge company if something as simple as this takes 20k employees more than a week, tops, to put into production. And I'm being generous with the week estimate, because it could be done even faster than that under more agile conditions. And a 'default blacklist of known content farmers' is not even the only solution which could be implemented quickly, you could also do something like add another variable to the PageRank algorithm which has a down weighing effect on any page under a domain known to be a content farmer/spammer. Supposedly, they are already doing this (IIRC) but again, the basic idea could be implemented and put into production quickly, if it hasn't already.