whoismua
Joined 12 years ago
Karma
160
Submissions
100
Member since
Apr 5
Recent submissions
Comment · 12 years ago
Comment · 12 years ago
If Google became as large as AT&T and Comcast they'd be worst. I'm sure At&T and Comcast would support making Google's bread and butter (say Adwords or tracking data) open source or more open too.
Google makes a lot of their money when people download /upload /view a lot of files and videos since they slap ads on them. At&t etc must carry them, so there's a conflict of interests. No one is really on your side, just some of their interests may align with ours..for now.
Comment · 12 years ago
Apparently not...Google--the fair and balanced search engine--decided that ads and Google's own properties are better.
Have you noticed Google's earnings reports that mention a 20+% increase in ad clicks every quarter? Where do you think that's coming from? From shifting traffic away from other sites to Google, so instead of going to Metafilter Google decides that a G+ post of youtube video is better,
Comment · 12 years ago
Useless article by Danny Sullivan, his columns have offered zero advice for years now. He knows nothing special these days.
So MetaFilter has been getting some "help" from Google's public relations squad, as is usually the case with sites that hit a nerve with HN. What about the thousand or million other sites that lost their traffic?
Comment · 12 years ago
My guess is that most people will just close the window and FB can claim to care about privacy (...as much as McD's cares about your cholesterol)
Comment · 12 years ago
You miss the point completely: If Google ads an extra ad you might lose 20% of your traffic even if your rank stays the same. Or if they ad youtube videos on the display, or books, or local or whatever....
So call it manual, algorithmic, display change or whatever, you're f-ed and call moves more of web traffic to its own properties.
Comment · 12 years ago
Especially now that Google is a "content provider," sites like Metafilter have to battle Youtube, Google+ etc for ranking. Guess who's winning? Traffic is going away from other sites to Google's own properties and there's isn't a damn thing metafilter et al can do: Google handles ranking, display and ads.
Commercial sites now have to deal with a full page of ads before the real results so their fate is sealed another way. In other words, we need 4-5 search engines, not one giant monopoly that seeks to increase ad clicks by underhanded methods each quarter.
Comment · 12 years ago
Resorting to Hitler right away? How about a person who cannot a job because of a certain stupid act from 30 years ago that keeps showing up on Google search?
Even credit reports are barred from reporting older than x years acts.
Comment · 12 years ago
The scale is what I find amazing....That is the challenge I see Google facing, on the one hand AdSense is a thing, on the other its prone to fraud.
I don't really feel sorry for Google at all. They are making $10 to $12 BILLION a year in profit, even after paying amazing salaries, benefits and spending money on a lot of unrelated stuff. So they can hire, 100, 100 or 10,000 new employees to screen better and to reduce false positives. Google is used to profiting from the web while having no responsibility (at least the new Google,) but now no one is buying their shtick. Soon or later the algo changes that shift traffic from other sites to Google and from small sites to larger sites (likely advertisers) will be scrutinized as well.
Comment · 12 years ago
Chuck, the problem--and IMO it's legit--is that Google allows you sign up, you earn some money and then for no explained reason you lose all of it as they close they your account. Now Google could screen all sites first (not likely) or pay the money earned till banning day. Sure it's written on the TOS, but doesn't seem fair and maybe it's illegal.
Comment · 12 years ago
>> "This Steve Berman guy behind the suit was a Microsoft lawyer, it's notable becase another Microsoft lawyer tried and failed to sue Google on ad/antitrust grounds a few years back"
Even worst, he uses Microsoft Windows, making this a clear Microsoft smear against the angelic Google. :)
>>This is the second class action attempt launched against Google by this trial-lawyer outfit As if Google is any better than them.
Google will probably end up paying for the clicks not deemed individually fraudulent, TOS or not.
So how did that work out for them?"
Hmmm.....just hmmm....
I do not buy that Google Search is not doing Google Adword's bidding, directly or indirectly. They know why advertises and who doesn't, by name and by category ("large brands" for example. ) So unless Google is separated in two separately owned parts (Search and Ads) I think people have every reason to question this. Especially since a drop in traffic essentially forces a site to buy ads.
the same goes for Android and Chrome, many of their features are to drive people to Google search.