5 ms·
That's phrasing the problem in a format where the only solution is Google. Re-phrasing it as "What else can a search engine do to stop being gamed?" opens up a
by blowski 5y ago
That's phrasing the problem in a format where the only solution is Google. Re-phrasing it as "What else can a search engine do to stop being gamed?" opens up a lot more options.
The real problem here is not 'gamed search engines' but too much centralisation, with Google owning the search engine, the browser, and the ad platform. This solution makes that problem worse, not better.
- ehnto 5y agoThe entire premise of the speed metrics influencing search results is to make sure Google search is a fast experience. A decade ago, it seemed at first that the point was a benevolent attempt to make the web a better place using their influence, but I can't accept that anymore.
- jsnell 5y agoSorry, no. You're moving the goalposts. The criticism from eli was not e.g. that using page speed as a ranking criteria is intrinsically bad. It was that the data was sourced only from Chrome (including the italics). It's like I've fallen into a crazy parallel dimension. For more than *five years* HN commenters have been ranting about how AMP is not needed, and all that's needed is using page speed as the signal. And now when that happens, it's suddenly an outrage.
- forgetfulness 5y agoSo... you're thinking that HN is gaslighting you because you don't see that it's Google controlling the web and publishing that's the issue.
- dado3212 5y agoIt’s true of any contentious content. The commenters who engage are usually the ones who want to push back against the main article (otherwise you just get a highly upvoted post with minimal comments because it’s hard to come up with a value-adding way to say “yes, this”). But you end up getting different people commenting on both sides, with neither half as invested when the source agrees with them. Grouping them together as a cohesive “HN” obscures that division, and makes it seem like the position suddenly reverses.
- eli 5y agoHN isn't a monolith and someone will always find something to complain about. (I'm happy to be the someone here.) Google has such a dominant position in both search and browsers that, yeah, they're going to need to work extra hard to make sure one doesn't unfairly advantage the other.
- gerash 5y agoI remember that. Every other post on HN used to be how bad AMP is for the future of human civilization and how Google should have used page performance in their ranking instead. Well, Google did just that and now eli et al. moved the goal post. The morale of the story is it's impossible to make everyone happy.
- eli 5y agoI'm not an ambassador of HN opinion and I didn't set the first goalpost. But there's no contradiction in asking for a neutral way to include performance in the rankings and then being disappointed when the solution considers only performance of Google's own browser.
- blowski 5y agoIf someone goes from regularly punching me in the arm to kicking me in the shins, I'm not going to say "gee thanks for not punching me in the arm any more". Shifting from one technology to another is not a solution when all the options vacuum and hoard data to further entrench Google's position. A real choice would be Google splitting the different parts of their business model they are leveraging to lock out competitors, but since that's not good for their shareholders, I don't expect to see it any time soon.