6 ms·

People should totally believe your conspiracy theory over the words of someone who actually works at Google (disclosure: so do I).

bsullivan01 13y ago
"People should totally believe your conspiracy theory over the words of someone who actually works at Google (disclosure: so do I)" Oh yeah, that's all do, trust those accused of scamming. The same goes on Wall Street, SEC, FTC, IRS /taxes etc. If the employees of said company swear on internet forums that they are not manipulating anything, it's over.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  I'm all for believing that there's a scam when there's evidence of a scam (as opposed to this, where the results are indistinguishable from what they would be if Google were acting in good faith, and no other evidence has been presented). https://duckduckgo.com/?q=computer https://duckduckgo.com/?q=computer http://www.bing.com/search?q=computer http://www.bing.com/search?q=computer It's a conspiracy, and we've even managed to rope DuckDuckGo into it.
  - brymaster 13y ago
    How Google is Killing Organic Search https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971560 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971560 Forrester: Consumers Prefer Organic Search, Not Search Ads, For Discovery http://searchengineland.com/forrester-consumers-prefer-organic-search-not-search-ads-for-discovery-164112 http://searchengineland.com/forrester-consumers-prefer-organ...
powertower 13y ago
> Staff software engineer at Google. I work on making infrastructure fast. Do you really believe that your job would be involved, or even have access to, the business process that weights the effect of algorithmic changes to Ad CTRs? And then approving or disproving those changes based on those factors? Think about it - You're telling us that if a algorithmic change improves the relevant search score by 3%, but at the same time has the effect of decreasing Ad CTR by 3%, it will go through!.. Because no one tracks this, and no one cares. That might be an engineer's take on this, but no one at a higher business level (that deals with money) would be so naive about it. I also don't see how this could even remotely be classified as a conspiracy theory considering it's about as standard of operating procedures as it gets... You don't fuck yourself nor your revenue numbers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not insulting you or your job. I just don't think you are seeing the bigger picture and the place Google is right now (search market domination), and how this affects the direction they have to go to keep the desired revenue growth projections, stock prices, etc.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  > Do you really believe that you would be involved . . . I wouldn't tell you that even if I knew, and I don't. My point is only that someone who DOES have reason to know commented about it above. I believe him over someone who argues that Google is messing with the results for money, especially if the guy's evidence for the conspiracy consists solely of Google ordering the results for a query the same way everyone else does (see my other comment in this tree). My disclosure is just so that someone wouldn't go fishing in my profile and accuse me of withholding my association. It is not like I am an authority on the way Google ranks stuff -- there are probably thousands of people outside the company that know more about it than I do. > considering it's about as standard of operating procedures as it gets How would you know what the standard operating procedure is? As far as I can tell, it's just a presumption on your part, and you think that somehow this counts as evidence that it's not a conspiracy theory. Sorry, that doesn't work.
  - powertower 13y ago
    I'm assuming the #1 S.O.P. (dealing with changes) for any business is you don't implement changes that negatively impact your revenue numbers. I'm also assuming that Ad CTR (or some portion of it) is dependent on the user not getting what he/she wants in the organic search results section.
    - jamesaguilar 13y ago
      I don't think that is a safe assumption. There are plenty of documents, e.g. our IPO document, that indicate that we play the long game of providing the best results, and if the short game of getting the most revenue is harmed by that, well, tough. We play that way because the only way to keep users is to please them, and good results are critical to that end. To be clear, I don't think you are completely unreasonable for believing what you do. Other companies are crappy, so why not Google? But you don't have any evidence, and I think you are way overstating your case.
      - bsullivan01 13y ago

bsullivan01 13y ago

"People should totally believe your conspiracy theory over the words of someone who actually works at Google (disclosure: so do I)" Oh yeah, that's all do, trust those accused of scamming. The same goes on Wall Street, SEC, FTC, IRS /taxes etc. If the employees of said company swear on internet forums that they are not manipulating anything, it's over.

jamesaguilar 13y ago
I'm all for believing that there's a scam when there's evidence of a scam (as opposed to this, where the results are indistinguishable from what they would be if Google were acting in good faith, and no other evidence has been presented). https://duckduckgo.com/?q=computer https://duckduckgo.com/?q=computer http://www.bing.com/search?q=computer http://www.bing.com/search?q=computer It's a conspiracy, and we've even managed to rope DuckDuckGo into it.
- brymaster 13y ago
  How Google is Killing Organic Search https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971560 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971560 Forrester: Consumers Prefer Organic Search, Not Search Ads, For Discovery http://searchengineland.com/forrester-consumers-prefer-organic-search-not-search-ads-for-discovery-164112 http://searchengineland.com/forrester-consumers-prefer-organ...

powertower 13y ago

> Staff software engineer at Google. I work on making infrastructure fast. Do you really believe that your job would be involved, or even have access to, the business process that weights the effect of algorithmic changes to Ad CTRs? And then approving or disproving those changes based on those factors? Think about it - You're telling us that if a algorithmic change improves the relevant search score by 3%, but at the same time has the effect of decreasing Ad CTR by 3%, it will go through!.. Because no one tracks this, and no one cares. That might be an engineer's take on this, but no one at a higher business level (that deals with money) would be so naive about it. I also don't see how this could even remotely be classified as a conspiracy theory considering it's about as standard of operating procedures as it gets... You don't fuck yourself nor your revenue numbers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not insulting you or your job. I just don't think you are seeing the bigger picture and the place Google is right now (search market domination), and how this affects the direction they have to go to keep the desired revenue growth projections, stock prices, etc.

jamesaguilar 13y ago
> Do you really believe that you would be involved . . . I wouldn't tell you that even if I knew, and I don't. My point is only that someone who DOES have reason to know commented about it above. I believe him over someone who argues that Google is messing with the results for money, especially if the guy's evidence for the conspiracy consists solely of Google ordering the results for a query the same way everyone else does (see my other comment in this tree). My disclosure is just so that someone wouldn't go fishing in my profile and accuse me of withholding my association. It is not like I am an authority on the way Google ranks stuff -- there are probably thousands of people outside the company that know more about it than I do. > considering it's about as standard of operating procedures as it gets How would you know what the standard operating procedure is? As far as I can tell, it's just a presumption on your part, and you think that somehow this counts as evidence that it's not a conspiracy theory. Sorry, that doesn't work.
- powertower 13y ago
  I'm assuming the #1 S.O.P. (dealing with changes) for any business is you don't implement changes that negatively impact your revenue numbers. I'm also assuming that Ad CTR (or some portion of it) is dependent on the user not getting what he/she wants in the organic search results section.
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    I don't think that is a safe assumption. There are plenty of documents, e.g. our IPO document, that indicate that we play the long game of providing the best results, and if the short game of getting the most revenue is harmed by that, well, tough. We play that way because the only way to keep users is to please them, and good results are critical to that end. To be clear, I don't think you are completely unreasonable for believing what you do. Other companies are crappy, so why not Google? But you don't have any evidence, and I think you are way overstating your case.
    - bsullivan01 13y ago