4 ms·

Warning, direct link to PDF. And for some reason it is linked through Google. Direct link is http://www.ics.uci.edu/~franz/Site/pubs-pdf/BC03.pdf http://www.ics

• pmarin 15y ago
  Thanks. It is strange, the only think I did was to use "Copy link as..." in the contextual menu.
  • _delirium 15y ago
    Yeah, Google has started adding redirect cruft to search results in the past year or so, which is pretty annoying when trying to share links.
    • hollerith 15y ago
      Unless my mind is playing tricks on me, Google search results have been that way a lot longer than a year.
      • _delirium 15y ago
        You're right, looks like it's been at least since 2009. I recall they used to not have any redirects, and then they started inserting them randomly, for only maybe 5% of search results. Then at some point they got phased in for all results. Thought that phase-in was more recent, but seems not.
    • rbanffy 15y ago
      Not really cruft, but a very simple way to measure how relevant was that result for the search you did.
      • gruseom 15y ago
        Simple and valuable to Google, perhaps, but a major sign that they're no longer doing what's best for users. It breaks the web in at least two ways: makes it slower and hides the true links. I hate that they do this. Nothing has been more destructive of the warm feeling I used to have toward Google. I still use them out of habit but eventually irritation and the rise of some credible competitor will coincide and cause me to switch.
        • rbanffy 15y ago
          > a major sign that they're no longer doing what's best for users. How exactly improving the relevance of the returned results is not the best for their users? > makes it slower 257 ms here. Not that much compared to the 2 seconds the actual server took to start returning the data. > hides the true links The proper URL is the green line under the title. Here it says "www.ics.uci.edu/~franz/Site/pubs-pdf/BC03.pdf".
          • _delirium 15y ago
            > The proper URL is the green line under the title. If the URL is short enough that works fine, but if it's longer you can't copy the URL from there, because Google will insert an ellipsis in the middle of the long URL. For example, an article I was searching for just now shows up on the green line as ssdi.di.fct.unl.pt/masters/mcl/content/.../Robinson-CL2000.pdf. Can't copy that, and can't get the original URL from the right-click either!
            • rbanffy 15y ago
              Isn't this occasional problem worth having in return for better search results? How often you copy the link URL instead of checking what's on the other side?
  • huma 15y ago
    It'd be nice to have a [PDF] tag in the link.
  • wazoox 15y ago
    That's why I use the "Google/Yandex Search link Fix" Firefox extension.
• aqrashik 15y ago
  The original link seems to be a search result, which makes me wonder could this be used as some sort of SEO technique. I'm not implying that this was OP's intention, just that from what basic understanding of SEO I have, Google takes into consideration click through rates of a link, higher click throughs resulting in more favorable rankings. So, theoretically, if you could get a lot of people to visit an article using Google's search link, instead of a direct link, would that somehow convince Google to rank it more favorably? Again, not something I'm accusing the OP of, just generally wondering.
  • pmarin 15y ago
    You are right, It was a search result. I had problems with the link I found in the Wikipedia ( http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.90.7173&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.90....) but not sure if simply I was filling the wrong entry box in the submit page.
  • kristianp 15y ago
    I imagine google checks that search redirect links actually come from a search result (SR) page, for example by checking the referer. Should this post be flagged because it is a duplicate bypassing the dup detection by using a google SR link? Perhaps.