4 ms·

Thinking on this more, the cloud-stored cache would wind up eventually being a subset of google's whole-internet-database. From which you could run a pretty awe

by roc 14y ago

Thinking on this more, the cloud-stored cache would wind up eventually being a subset of google's whole-internet-database. From which you could run a pretty awesome search service. Because it wouldn't consist of randomly spidered or submitted noise. It would only be things explicitly identified as useful or interesting. And you could rank by how many people bookmarked it, when the bookmarks happened, who they are, etc -- alongside already-useful PageRank attributes. It'd be like +1 data, but the +1 would have meaning behind it.

T-hawk 14y ago
Until the SEO optimizers and bot nets themselves start bookmarking their own spammy noise in this cache too. Then we're back to the usual arms race of trying to identify quality content and providers pointing to other quality content and providers while all the junk vendors are trying to masquerade as quality.
- roc 14y ago
  Is there a lot of SEO that relies on 'like' or '+1' spam? Because that's the more apt comparison. Particularly when you consider the implementation of even a trivial 'karma' system. The very creation of a network of mannequins would seem to run counter to the big goal of most SEO (traffic, now) as the mannequins would require months-to-years of seemingly-valid traffic of build-up to become relevant and then a very slow-and-cautious release of bookmarks to the desired spam to even attempt to avoid detection and thus nullification of all the preceding effort. And the user-expectation of such a search would be heavily weighted to prior personal activity [1]. So even if mannequins were successfully pumping bookmarks to promote some site that just scraped stack-exchange, if you and I were bookmarking stack-exchange, we should always get the real links bubbling to the top. [1] Yes, this would raise a lot of the same "echo chamber" concerns that people have with Google search, but if it matches the user expectation, I don't see a problem with it.

by roc 14y ago

T-hawk 14y ago

Until the SEO optimizers and bot nets themselves start bookmarking their own spammy noise in this cache too. Then we're back to the usual arms race of trying to identify quality content and providers pointing to other quality content and providers while all the junk vendors are trying to masquerade as quality.

roc 14y ago
Is there a lot of SEO that relies on 'like' or '+1' spam? Because that's the more apt comparison. Particularly when you consider the implementation of even a trivial 'karma' system. The very creation of a network of mannequins would seem to run counter to the big goal of most SEO (traffic, now) as the mannequins would require months-to-years of seemingly-valid traffic of build-up to become relevant and then a very slow-and-cautious release of bookmarks to the desired spam to even attempt to avoid detection and thus nullification of all the preceding effort. And the user-expectation of such a search would be heavily weighted to prior personal activity [1]. So even if mannequins were successfully pumping bookmarks to promote some site that just scraped stack-exchange, if you and I were bookmarking stack-exchange, we should always get the real links bubbling to the top. [1] Yes, this would raise a lot of the same "echo chamber" concerns that people have with Google search, but if it matches the user expectation, I don't see a problem with it.