4 ms·

I feel like Google could filter out a lot of SEO spam by simply ignoring or downranking heavy sites. Everything that loads more than "n MB" is probably bloated

I feel like Google could filter out a lot of SEO spam by simply ignoring or downranking heavy sites. Everything that loads more than "n MB" is probably bloated and made to trick you into buying something or generating traffic without providing value. Another method could be to analyze how many external requests a page makes and put that into the calculation. Of course, there are exceptions, but I think this might help.

einr 4y ago
Downranking these sites will overwhelmingly mean downranking those who spend money on Google ads. It will not happen because it is exactly contrary to Google making more money. Of course Google has PageSpeed, which supposedly influences rankings by downranking sites that are very heavy to load, so I mean, that's an aspect to take into account, but I still believe the above to be largely true.
mojuba 4y ago
Thought the same, but it would be unfair to web sites that are actual web apps and are JS-heavy. Google is hopeless anyway, so here's something for the next search engine that wants to bring back the Web: downrank by the number of 3rd party domain requests, attempts of tracking, and possibly also popups.
- chii 4y ago
  How would one detect what is a popup and what is an interactive dialog that the user actually desires?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - mojuba 4y ago
    If you show an example of something that pops up right after the initial load, and that a user actually desires, we'll think of ways. I can't think of any right now. Things should pop up in response to a click, generally.
- account42 4y ago
  How many web apps do you want to jump into right from google searches as opposed to the search leading to a landing page explaining WTF the app does. Or do you mean sites like reddit, facebook, etc. by "apps"? In that case, downrank them seems fine - they can always provide lighter version.
Nextgrid 4y ago
The presence of ads, analytics and affiliate links are a good proxy for "spam site" and is very hard to game, so downranking them is a trivial solution. Google will never do it because those ads & analytics can be Google's and benefit their bottom line.
Cthulhu_ 4y ago
I was confident they already included page speed in their rankings, but who knows what the status of that is? After some (ironically) googling, I've found three blog posts from May 2020 [0], November 2020 [1] and April 2021 [2] announcing it, the last one saying it went live in August 2021. But I was sure they talked about it years ago, hence the PageSpeed Insights and Lighthouse tools. [0] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/05/evaluating-page-experience https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/05/evaluating... [1] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/11/timing-for-page-experience https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/11/timing-for... [2] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2021/04/more-details-page-experience https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2021/04/more-detai...
onion2k 4y ago
generating traffic without providing value Those sites generate plenty of value ... for Google. Even if they're not showing Google adverts, those sites normalize the idea that "websites have adverts", so users don't question it on other sites. If Google started returning sites with low numbers of adverts first then users would start demanding more sites with fewer ads. Google really don't want to show fewer adverts.
karaterobot 4y ago
People literally curate lists of websites that are only spam, and provide no value in search results[1]. Even if Google only cared a little bit about blocking the worst 1% of websites they don't already block, they would simply copy these lists, or use them as a starting point. Let alone devoting actual resources of their own. But they don't even do that. [1] e.g. https://iorate.github.io/ublacklist/subscriptions https://iorate.github.io/ublacklist/subscriptions

einr 4y ago

Downranking these sites will overwhelmingly mean downranking those who spend money on Google ads. It will not happen because it is exactly contrary to Google making more money. Of course Google has PageSpeed, which supposedly influences rankings by downranking sites that are very heavy to load, so I mean, that's an aspect to take into account, but I still believe the above to be largely true.

mojuba 4y ago

Thought the same, but it would be unfair to web sites that are actual web apps and are JS-heavy. Google is hopeless anyway, so here's something for the next search engine that wants to bring back the Web: downrank by the number of 3rd party domain requests, attempts of tracking, and possibly also popups.

chii 4y ago
How would one detect what is a popup and what is an interactive dialog that the user actually desires?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mojuba 4y ago
  If you show an example of something that pops up right after the initial load, and that a user actually desires, we'll think of ways. I can't think of any right now. Things should pop up in response to a click, generally.
account42 4y ago
How many web apps do you want to jump into right from google searches as opposed to the search leading to a landing page explaining WTF the app does. Or do you mean sites like reddit, facebook, etc. by "apps"? In that case, downrank them seems fine - they can always provide lighter version.

Nextgrid 4y ago

The presence of ads, analytics and affiliate links are a good proxy for "spam site" and is very hard to game, so downranking them is a trivial solution. Google will never do it because those ads & analytics can be Google's and benefit their bottom line.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

I was confident they already included page speed in their rankings, but who knows what the status of that is? After some (ironically) googling, I've found three blog posts from May 2020 [0], November 2020 [1] and April 2021 [2] announcing it, the last one saying it went live in August 2021. But I was sure they talked about it years ago, hence the PageSpeed Insights and Lighthouse tools. [0] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/05/evaluating-page-experience https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/05/evaluating... [1] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/11/timing-for-page-experience https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2020/11/timing-for... [2] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2021/04/more-details-page-experience https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2021/04/more-detai...

onion2k 4y ago

generating traffic without providing value Those sites generate plenty of value ... for Google. Even if they're not showing Google adverts, those sites normalize the idea that "websites have adverts", so users don't question it on other sites. If Google started returning sites with low numbers of adverts first then users would start demanding more sites with fewer ads. Google really don't want to show fewer adverts.

karaterobot 4y ago

People literally curate lists of websites that are only spam, and provide no value in search results[1]. Even if Google only cared a little bit about blocking the worst 1% of websites they don't already block, they would simply copy these lists, or use them as a starting point. Let alone devoting actual resources of their own. But they don't even do that. [1] e.g. https://iorate.github.io/ublacklist/subscriptions https://iorate.github.io/ublacklist/subscriptions