If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
Robert Macy wrote in news:804fdf6d-c0a8-440e-8f50-
: 2.Reduced number of listings per screen shot, don't see how to get more than an incredibly small number of hits on a page! I used to be able to get 100 entries on a single page, with that left I could then go down through selecting ones to view separately. Now have to scroll to new page, go back and forth between pages, etc, etc !!! That can be fixed in settings. (I like 20 per page). |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
Lostgallifreyan wrote in
: throwing spam from content mills like Ehow.com at us About that... (Ehow does apparently make actual content, none of the ones I just explored do even that much!) Example of how Google allows spamming from content mills with no effort to resist despite claiming otherwise: Search terms: allintitle: tooltip win32 api First twenty results include these domains, every one as bogus as it looks. They all have the same string, as follows: "Hello Community,. I have to show a Tooltip for a control via Win32-API programmatically..." Domains: girlit.net Fake link, diverts to demand your attention to a language teachign method (I think that's what it is anyway). www.techques.com Ad-based page, content taken (ostensibly under license) from Stackoverflow.com. That happens a lot. www.nerdground.com Dead. Another content mill, now apparently shut down, Google don't care, they STILL address it as if it meant something, even after other people shut it down. www.justlogged.com Another ad-based content mill riding on Stackoverfow's output. They're honest about this, but it still stinks. wwv.comanswer.com Same as above. Yet another content mill. ho.runcode.us Ad nauseam, run by the same people as the last, not even trying hard to prove otherwise! efreedom.com Strange one. A content mill, but no ads. I have to wonder what they get out of this one. ansaurus.com And again. Also no ads. And that was just the ones that copied the thread title, there may be tens or hundreds more that dragged out bleeding chunks, failed to aknowledge sources, and even snipped paragaphs mid-word to sneak ad-heavy pages into high Google rankings. My point is very basic: Google say they are trying to stamp this out, but clearly they are not, as this (and far worse) now heavily dominates their output, and that's just the ones that have ACTUAL LINGUISTIC SYNTAX, and are not fragmented beyond legibility. They really don't care, because it's easy enough to filter. WE could do it too, if they let us have an exact substring match to use to elimate all the bogus copies at one stroke. They don't clean this up, and they will not let us have clean results, because it is not in their interest to do so. The idea that they have a huge library of real content to find for us is about 95% illusion! Once people get to grips with this, it might improve, but not otherwise. Google has turned into a giant paper-shredder, and they're encouraging worse. They want all our info, and exchange, we get all their noise. Never mind dreckburgers, this is **** they want us to eat. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
On Mar 8, 12:50*am, Lostgallifreyan wrote:
Lostgallifreyan wrote 5: throwing spam from content mills like Ehow.com at us About that... (Ehow does apparently make actual content, none of the ones I just explored do even that much!) Example of how Google allows spamming from content mills with no effort to resist despite claiming otherwise: Search terms: allintitle: tooltip win32 api First twenty results include these domains, every one as bogus as it looks. They all have the same string, as follows: "Hello Community,. I have to show a Tooltip for a control via Win32-API programmatically..." Domains: girlit.net Fake link, diverts to demand your attention to a language teachign method (I think that's what it is anyway). www.techques.com Ad-based page, content taken (ostensibly under license) from Stackoverflow.com. That happens a lot. www.nerdground.com Dead. Another content mill, now apparently shut down, Google don't care, they STILL address it as if it meant something, even after other people shut it down. www.justlogged.com Another ad-based content mill riding on Stackoverfow's output. They're honest about this, but it still stinks. wwv.comanswer.com Same as above. Yet another content mill. ho.runcode.us Ad nauseam, run by the same people as the last, not even trying hard to prove otherwise! efreedom.com Strange one. A content mill, but no ads. I have to wonder what they get out of this one. ansaurus.com And again. Also no ads. And that was just the ones that copied the thread title, there may be tens or hundreds more that dragged out bleeding chunks, failed to aknowledge sources, and even snipped paragaphs mid-word to sneak ad-heavy pages into high Google rankings. My point is very basic: Google say they are trying to stamp this out, but clearly they are not, as this (and far worse) now heavily dominates their output, and that's just the ones that have ACTUAL LINGUISTIC SYNTAX, and are not fragmented beyond legibility. They really don't care, because it's easy enough to filter. WE could do it too, if they let us have an exact substring match to use to elimate all the bogus copies at one stroke. They don't clean this up, and they will not let us have clean results, because it is not in their interest to do so. The idea that they have a huge library of real content to find for us is about 95% illusion! Once people get to grips with this, it might improve, but not otherwise. Google has turned into a giant paper-shredder, and they're encouraging worse. They want all our info, and exchange, we get all their noise. Never mind dreckburgers, this is **** they want us to eat. Your earlier phrase about a cranky aunt that's painful to see is EXACTLY correct. What used to be the fastest easiest experience on the net has turned into a total grind. Actually dread having to search for anything now. I'd rather read the bibliographies at the end of papers. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:33:25 -0600, Lostgallifreyan
put finger to keyboard and composed: Robert Macy wrote in news:804fdf6d-c0a8-440e-8f50- : 2.Reduced number of listings per screen shot, don't see how to get more than an incredibly small number of hits on a page! I used to be able to get 100 entries on a single page, with that left I could then go down through selecting ones to view separately. Now have to scroll to new page, go back and forth between pages, etc, etc !!! That can be fixed in settings. (I like 20 per page). Mine is set for 25 via a Google cookie: http://www.google.com/preferences?hl=en I also found the following: http://support.google.com/websearch/...&answer=136861 Fill in the blanks (*) "Note that the * operator works only on whole words, not parts of words." Elsewhere it states that ... "Generally, punctuation is ignored, including @#$%^&*()=+[]\ and other special characters." Doesn't that mean that the asterisk in -conver* would be treated as punctuation and therefore ignored (as would the + operator)? - Franc Zabkar -- Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
Franc Zabkar wrote in
: I also found the following: http://support.google.com/websearch/...dv_operators&a nswer=136861 Fill in the blanks (*) "Note that the * operator works only on whole words, not parts of words." Good point. It appeared to work for me at times. eBay allow it and I may have just confused that usage. But then, it IS a tad strange when it works on eBay, but a dedicated search engine can't do it! Most people know that a * wildcard means match anything at and after that point, with bounds limited by whatever context applies. Google expect us to accept stemming, yet fail to let us use that wildcard for modifying stemming, in direct defiance of expectations based on DOS and UNIX practise. Seems to back up my assertion that they want to deny us precise control, and yield to their mushy logic. Elsewhere it states that ... "Generally, punctuation is ignored, including @#$%^&*()=+[]\ and other special characters." Doesn't that mean that the asterisk in -conver* would be treated as punctuation and therefore ignored (as would the + operator)? Presumably, but that would make it hard for them to explain the difference in results you got for C and +C. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Off-topic Google-related rant.
On Mar 8, 7:17*pm, Franc Zabkar wrote:
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:33:25 -0600, Lostgallifreyan put finger to keyboard and composed: Robert Macy wrote in news:804fdf6d-c0a8-440e-8f50- : 2.Reduced number of listings per screen shot, don't see how to get more than an incredibly small number of hits on a page! I used to be able to get 100 entries on a single page, with that left I could then go down through selecting ones to view separately. Now have to scroll to new page, go back and forth between pages, etc, etc !!! That can be fixed in settings. (I like 20 per page). Mine is set for 25 via a Google cookie:http://www.google.com/preferences?hl=en I also found the following:http://support.google.com/websearch/...&p=adv_operato... Fill in the blanks (*) "Note that the * operator works only on whole words, not parts of words." Elsewhere it states that ... "Generally, punctuation is ignored, including @#$%^&*()=+[]\ and other special characters." Doesn't that mean that the asterisk in -conver* would be treated as punctuation and therefore ignored (as would the + operator)? - Franc Zabkar -- Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. google's "improvements" included not letting me LOG OUT, nor gain access to any personal settings. just get NOTHING! when I click, or pull down an extra menu and click |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
On topic, --- but Off topic;; winrar | jack | General | 13 | May 24th 09 10:22 AM |
On topic, --- but Off topic;; winrar | jack | General | 0 | May 23rd 09 01:18 PM |
Sorry about my earlier rant | Dan | General | 5 | September 9th 06 12:19 AM |
NOTHING MSN RELATED!? | helpme | Internet | 1 | August 4th 04 01:57 PM |