3 ms·

> I don’t want search results to depend on my choice of web technologies (see AMP), or commercial relations between search engine and third parties. (I work at

> I don’t want search results to depend on my choice of web technologies (see AMP), or commercial relations between search engine and third parties. (I work at Google, but not on search). My understanding is that AMP doesn't actually affect ranking. Performance affects ranking, and AMP affects performance. But so do many other things. There's also a similar conversation about placement (the "carousel"), which isn't ranking exactly, and that is affected by web technologies, in that certain placements require certain types of structure in the underlying site (metadata, etc.). AMP is one, but not the only, way to achieve this. > By “fair” I mean I want it to only depend on the content of the site. This is a definition of fairness, but it's certainly not the only one, and it may not be the best one. As a user, I want my search results to be tailored to me, which means that your ranking would depend on third parties (my priors). Like, as an alternative, Google could list all search results alphabetically by url, like a phone book. That's fair too. But probably worse. So discussions of fairness don't make sense, because there are tons of terrible but "fair" ranking strategies, and for basically any query, there's someone who thinks they should be higher and that the reason they aren't is that the system is unfair. > or commercial relations between search engine and third parties. Do you mean ad space, or something else?

Const-me 6y ago
> My understanding is that AMP doesn't actually affect ranking They tell they use AMP versions to measure performance, and the performance affects ranking. AMP is hosted by the same google who does ranking, they gonna measure better performance because it’s their local network. Not sure it was an oversight, looks more like cheating. Apparently, they’re planning to revert in 2021, but I think it’s too little too late. I think they only doing it due to public and political pressure. Unless regulated, they’ll continue to implement features which maximize their profit at the expense of everyone else on the internets, both users and web site owners. > As a user, I want my search results to be tailored to me I certainly don’t, BTW that’s one of the reasons why I’m using duckduckgo instead. Why would you want personalized results? Doesn’t it effectively limit search space to things you already know, or like? That thing probably ain’t a filter technically, and neither it’s censorship legally, but practically speaking reordering stuff to later pages is as good as filtering. > Do you mean ad space, or something else? UX patterns to blur the line between fair and paid results. Try to disable ad.blockers, search for something generic and advertised worldwide like “web hosting”, and compare search result pages between google and DDG. Google’s “Ad” is barely noticeable, DDG’s “Ad” has very noticeable outline. Google doesn’t show URL, DDG does. Also, too much garbage in general. Google shows maps despite completely irrelevant for online-only services like web hosting. The result is more than a page of garbage before the first fair search result, and that’s on my 27” 4k monitor. Will probably be couple pages of garbage for a user with average display and without ad blockers.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Note that you've subtly changed the discussion from "here's why Google should be a public utility" to "here's what personally perturbs me about Google, and why I dislike it". > Google’s “Ad” is barely noticeable, DDG’s “Ad” has very noticeable outline. Google doesn’t show URL, DDG does. This is personal preference (and possibly subject to experiments), but when I searched "android phone", I found it easier to differentiate ads on Google (which shows "Ad" at the beginning of the line) than DDG (which shows "Ad" at the end, or on a second line if the title overflows). Both show URLs.
  - Const-me 6y ago
    > here's why Google should be a public utility I don’t think it’s too important. What’s important is enforceable regulations. There’re many industries that aren’t public utilities but are heavily regulated for safety reasons, e.g. food production and air transportation. > This is personal preference (and possibly subject to experiments) http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g1.png http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g1.png Just two “Ad” letters with no other visual cues. http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g2.png http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g2.png The first fair search result, note the scroll bar position on the right, there’re 2 pages of garbage above. No URLs anywhere. Right click / copy link is broken as well, copies “google.com/url?” something. http://const.me/tmp/web-search/ddg.png http://const.me/tmp/web-search/ddg.png “AD” is uppercase, outlined, also note the “Report Ad” text. The combination of these 3 things makes ads clearly marked as such, unlike google’s result page. Note the initial portion of the result URL is visible, not just the domain. Right click / copy link works. The fair search results start at the top of the page, immediately after a paid one. There’s no motivation for google to be friendlier towards users or web site owners. Quite the opposite, they have strong financial incentive to mix ads into fair results. The only way to fix that is legal pressure with laws and/or antimonopoly prosecution. It worked with Microsoft in 1998-2001. In 2000 a court ordered breakup of MS. They won the appeal so it didn’t happen, but they were really scared apparently. They were also forced to change a lot of things in their products, which benefit both end users, and third-party developers. I don’t see how de-facto monopoly in web search is different from de-facto monopoly in PC OSes.

Const-me 6y ago

> My understanding is that AMP doesn't actually affect ranking They tell they use AMP versions to measure performance, and the performance affects ranking. AMP is hosted by the same google who does ranking, they gonna measure better performance because it’s their local network. Not sure it was an oversight, looks more like cheating. Apparently, they’re planning to revert in 2021, but I think it’s too little too late. I think they only doing it due to public and political pressure. Unless regulated, they’ll continue to implement features which maximize their profit at the expense of everyone else on the internets, both users and web site owners. > As a user, I want my search results to be tailored to me I certainly don’t, BTW that’s one of the reasons why I’m using duckduckgo instead. Why would you want personalized results? Doesn’t it effectively limit search space to things you already know, or like? That thing probably ain’t a filter technically, and neither it’s censorship legally, but practically speaking reordering stuff to later pages is as good as filtering. > Do you mean ad space, or something else? UX patterns to blur the line between fair and paid results. Try to disable ad.blockers, search for something generic and advertised worldwide like “web hosting”, and compare search result pages between google and DDG. Google’s “Ad” is barely noticeable, DDG’s “Ad” has very noticeable outline. Google doesn’t show URL, DDG does. Also, too much garbage in general. Google shows maps despite completely irrelevant for online-only services like web hosting. The result is more than a page of garbage before the first fair search result, and that’s on my 27” 4k monitor. Will probably be couple pages of garbage for a user with average display and without ad blockers.

joshuamorton 6y ago
Note that you've subtly changed the discussion from "here's why Google should be a public utility" to "here's what personally perturbs me about Google, and why I dislike it". > Google’s “Ad” is barely noticeable, DDG’s “Ad” has very noticeable outline. Google doesn’t show URL, DDG does. This is personal preference (and possibly subject to experiments), but when I searched "android phone", I found it easier to differentiate ads on Google (which shows "Ad" at the beginning of the line) than DDG (which shows "Ad" at the end, or on a second line if the title overflows). Both show URLs.
- Const-me 6y ago
  > here's why Google should be a public utility I don’t think it’s too important. What’s important is enforceable regulations. There’re many industries that aren’t public utilities but are heavily regulated for safety reasons, e.g. food production and air transportation. > This is personal preference (and possibly subject to experiments) http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g1.png http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g1.png Just two “Ad” letters with no other visual cues. http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g2.png http://const.me/tmp/web-search/g2.png The first fair search result, note the scroll bar position on the right, there’re 2 pages of garbage above. No URLs anywhere. Right click / copy link is broken as well, copies “google.com/url?” something. http://const.me/tmp/web-search/ddg.png http://const.me/tmp/web-search/ddg.png “AD” is uppercase, outlined, also note the “Report Ad” text. The combination of these 3 things makes ads clearly marked as such, unlike google’s result page. Note the initial portion of the result URL is visible, not just the domain. Right click / copy link works. The fair search results start at the top of the page, immediately after a paid one. There’s no motivation for google to be friendlier towards users or web site owners. Quite the opposite, they have strong financial incentive to mix ads into fair results. The only way to fix that is legal pressure with laws and/or antimonopoly prosecution. It worked with Microsoft in 1998-2001. In 2000 a court ordered breakup of MS. They won the appeal so it didn’t happen, but they were really scared apparently. They were also forced to change a lot of things in their products, which benefit both end users, and third-party developers. I don’t see how de-facto monopoly in web search is different from de-facto monopoly in PC OSes.