The 800lb Gorilla
-
Well, despite their size and explosive growth I think the reality is that Google isn't as mature a company as Microsoft so can be expected to make a few goofs here and there, and yes, Microsoft had their wrists slapped and been forced to comply to some extent and haven't always done so willingly, but I'd have to observe that whilst any company of that size must surely employ at least a few sociopaths, (i) I don't think Bill Gates is one of them, and neither is Steve Ballmer, and (ii) all the Microsoft employees I've ever met have been decent, courteous people, and very sharp with it.
"Google is flat out scary. They are the 800lb gorilla of the search engine. And you never know what they choose to withhold presenting. And they have a perfect alibi - our search spiders simply didn't find it. There is absolutely no transparency."
Sure, they're scary. I mean where the heck did they spring up from all of a sudden? But scary isn't the same thing as evil. Inevitably they're going to step on a few peoples' toes, possibly quite a few. That doesn't necessarily make them evil either; large and clumsy maybe, but not evil. If you don't trust them there are other search engines: Yahoo and Microsoft spring to mind, and I've heard a few good things about Microsoft's search, although I'll freely admit I've been too extensively borged by Google to give it a go yet.
"Look at the simple technology. Say you do an advanced search returning 100 links. How are you going to know that you are missing 5% or 10% or 20% of the really relevant links? As long as they return 100 links (and some times you are actually happier when they return 16 instead of 100), you are satisfied and "Google rocks". But did they really? You just don't know."
Isn't that true of any commercial search engine? Even discounting nefarious intent no search algorithm is perfect so it's almost inevitable that at least some of the time some relevant links may not appear, or may appear far down the list of results. And that being the case wouldn't it also be true of any non-commercial search engine?
"And their advertising click-throughs are purposefully designed to look like other links without the bling traditionally associated with internet pop-overs and side-by-side ads. Indeed, we rapidly train ourselves to avoid the bling but can be snookered by the info-mercial approach of Google's ad links."
Now you're just being cynical. The reason Google ads are unobtrusive is because they're clever enough to realise that intrusive ads really infuriate people and so they've toned them right down, but they're still easily distinguishable from "real" links. To be honest I've often found Google's ads to be useful simply because they're targeted based on your search and are therefore generally pretty relevant. Unlike for example TV or cinema advertising, rather than bombarding me with inane ads for products and services I don't want to buy, they actually show me something that might be useful to me and in which I might very well be interested.
"They definitely have a political agenda - left of center. Searches on conservative topics or people routinely come up with a large percentage of negative links while more liberal topics or people come up with a much smaller percentage. What other search results are being manipulated?"
Oh yeah, you think so? Ever tried searching for Tony Blair or Bill Clinton? Some of the links are really quite colourful. I do have a hypothesis that might explain any perceived political bias. Since the current US administration is Republican the most vocal and frequent criticism right now will be directed at them by those who oppose them. Since that criticism relates to current events, and since as a result of that there's likely to be quite a lot of other content linking to it at the moment, those pages are more likely to appear towards the top of your search results. In short what I'm saying is that any political bias in search results, if it exists, is likely to be an artifact of the page rank algorithm used by Google rather than a result of some deliberate subterfuge, and therefore under a Democrat administration, all other things being equal, I would perhaps expect to see that trend reversed.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I got to pay that line:
"...although I'll freely admit I've been too extensively borged by Google to give it a go yet."
Yet another thing I've never thought about was the political leaning of Google. I figure that it's just a search engine that provides results when I need to find stuff and that's all they are to me. I don't really care if they want to play silly games behind the scenes or rule the world. They're WAY behind Microsoft when it comes to that anyway - I dread the thought of going to Vista due to the hearsay about not being able to customise it (dunno if the stories are true or not but I will find out one day....).
I've learned to ignore the political leanings of some companies as a great deal of them are opinions made by people who have never met the person in question (of course, that doesn't stop me from saying that voting Hillary Clinton in as the first female POTUS will be a BIG mistake
Would vote for Condi Rice any day of the week though 
)I'll be sorely disappointed if that doesn't start the flames....
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
-
I will vote for Condi Rice too. But Hillary Clinton, I did not even vote for her for senator even I live in NY. But unfortunately NY is a democrate state and there was not a strong candidate to run against her.
-
Matt: "I'll be sorely disappointed if that doesn't start the flames.... " Aw. It's Friday! Don't put a downer on my weekend.
Oh what the hell. Clinton make my skin crawl. Same goes for her hubby. Don't like her politics. Don't like her thinking. Don't like her writing (if she did DO the writing). Don't like her.
As for Doctor Rice: Just the opposite. I think she might be better elsewhere than State though. As to looks well that is one doctor I would want in MY examining room.
And I do the close, slow, careful, and very thurough examination. 
ATBCharles Kincaid
-
LOL. Definitely Friday afternoon. Clearly being British I can't vote but it should be fun to watch this one from the sidelines.
-
Hey - I'm in Australia but that doesn't stop me commenting on the topic (even though the media provide just a few sound bites each week so that people are truly uninformed on what happens on the world stage).
No longer Friday arvo - now Monday morning. We, as a country, might be 8-18 hours ahead of the rest of the world (timewise) but there are many things that put us 20 years behind
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
Viewing 6 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply