zone411

74 ms·

871.
by zone411 16y ago
Maybe, but this quote talks about punishing sites copying content from other websites, which is not what they are doing. Most newspaper sites will have the same versions of AP or Reuters articles as well, but this new algorithm didn't affec
872.
by zone411 16y ago
Looking through this list of larger sites that dropped, I see one that is similar to the sites I'm talking about, so more people might be able to say what happened: findarticles.com. I have no relation to this site (it is actually a competi
873.
by zone411 16y ago
Matt, I've seen some high quality smaller sites (Internet versions of traditionally published books with original content) drop as well. Is there any place to submit such sites in order to help this algorithm improve?
874.
by zone411 16y ago
I know this is not a popular opinion here, but I'm not sure if I like Google reacting to what tech bloggers echo chamber talks about. Are we sure that this what is good for regular users and for the creation of quality content on the Intern
875.
by zone411 16y ago
The article mentions a complaint by a competitor, but there was also a thread about Overstock here: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4252178.htm .
876.
Google Penalizes Overstock for Search Tactics (online.wsj.com)
26 points by zone411 16y ago|19 comments
877.
by zone411 16y ago
Watches are now one of the few socially-acceptable pieces of jewelery for men. They are not about functionality.
878.
by zone411 16y ago
So you were structured as C-Corp?
879.
by zone411 16y ago
No, you are wrong about the timeline and what happened when. It is explained pretty clearly in the NYT article: "True, JCPenney.com’s showing in Google searches had declined slightly by Feb. 8, as the algorithm change began to take effect.
880.
Co-founder of Milo.com (bought by eBay for $75 mil) answering questions(forumserver.twoplustwo.com)
5 points by zone411 16y ago|0 comments
881.
by zone411 16y ago
I'm sorry but I have big problems with calling DDG a real search engine. Their page states "DuckDuckGo is a search engine like Google." BS. It's a meta search engine that relies on other real search engines, such as Bing, to get the results
882.
by zone411 16y ago
The problem with Wikipedia is that many of their articles are poorly regurgitated versions of other source articles from the Web and that these source articles get no Google credit at all, even if they are linked from the Wikipedia articles
883.
by zone411 16y ago
Wrong. I mentioned this before. Check out AdSense on the NY Times homepage. If you punish AdSense sites, you'll mostly punish smaller business or one-person sites that are not big enough to have in-house ad sales.
884.
by zone411 16y ago
First, I haven't noticed any significant increase in the frequency of spam sites appearing the Google search results. The biggest problem that I did notice is social bookmarking sites, like reddit and digg, outranking original content. They
885.
by zone411 16y ago
Did you look at the graph at all? It shows that the spike right around when Digg's problems occurred was just as big as their traffic increase over the last two years with the spike excluded. You need to count the increase in estimated and
886.
by zone411 16y ago
The graph based on their Google Analytics data https://www.google.com/adplanner/planning/site_profile?hl=en... shows that the increase in reddit's numbers to due to Digg's problems was major, whether their admins want to admit it or not.
887.
by zone411 16y ago
Not all spam sites have ads. Many online stores are quite spammy, for example, and they only promote stuff they sell themselves. On the other hand, would you consider Wikipedia's huge Jimbo Wales banners as ads?
888.
by zone411 16y ago
69% and 31%. It's in their SEC filings. If Google discriminated against websites with ads on it, their SERP quality would drop.
889.
by zone411 16y ago
They wouldn't use such a "metric" because it'd be completely useless, not for some other reasons you just made up. The homepage of the NY Times uses AdSense, for example.
890.
by zone411 16y ago
I don't think anybody would be too surprised to see a porn site using this sniffing trick, but some other sites listed are quite surprising to me: charter.net, namepros.com, morningstar.com, straightdope.com, twincities.com.
891.
YouPorn sued for sniffing browser history(news.cnet.com)
35 points by zone411 16y ago|26 comments
892.
by zone411 16y ago
I saw this $2 billion number in one report, but nothing close to it in the others. I hope this one report doesn't count gross merchandise sales as revenue. Anyway, EBITDA would be much more relevant and I didn't see anyone claim that it's c
893.
by zone411 16y ago
They had multiple founding rounds. I doubt it was people actually running this business day-to-day making this decision.
894.
by zone411 16y ago
I think this a bad move by Groupon. I don't think they have the critical mass yet to win over potential competition from Facebook or Google plus its AdSense network. I see their margins getting smaller. If the numbers that were quoted by th
895.
Sources: Groupon rejects Google’s offer; will stay independent(chicagobreakingbusiness.com)
90 points by zone411 16y ago|118 comments
896.
by zone411 16y ago
No, it's not any better. This estimate is useless, because of the things I mentioned. The Secret Service costs are likely the bulk of the spending, so unless they release them, we won't know the real numbers involved. Clinton did not spend
897.
by zone411 16y ago
You missed the point. The estimate is just as bad. I wasn't talking about the amount of money spent.
898.
by zone411 16y ago
I don't disagree with the general premise of this article but I find it ironic that Friedman says "Cooper also pointed out that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the entire war effort in Afghanistan was costing about $190 milli