TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Do Not Trust Google

61 点作者 DlSGUSTING将近 5 年前

9 条评论

joe-collins将近 5 年前
&gt; You don&#x27;t have to agree with them politically to see that Google is applying different standards to conservative content than to more liberal content.<p>Or, perhaps a <i>balanced</i> set of standards is being applied, and the author&#x27;s Overton Window is off-kilter, and the supposedly &quot;(merely) conservative&quot; content described therein remains outside of the actually-balanced metric for search ranking?<p>(Granting, yes, perfect balance for any actor or reference frame is impossible; and <i>accepting</i> that some degree of filtering-scare-quotes-censorship is a positive, pro-social quality in a search engine.)
评论 #24067765 未加载
bergstromm466将近 5 年前
<i>&quot;- what kind of users go to that websites (and does the user searching fit that profile)?<p>- how much traffic does the website get?<p>- how relevant the content is to the search term (SEO magic)?<p>- and, most importantly, does this website fit an acceptable narrative?&quot;</i><p>Google analytics seems like a real trojan horse. Surveillance with a side of analytics. Google benefits much more from such a product themselves, compared to the site owner&#x2F;manager, who supposedly gets thses analytics &#x27;for free&#x27;. It&#x27;s all such a clever and deceptive trick: &quot;just install this small GA snippet and maybe use our tag manager and get <i>detailed insights</i>&quot;. I know it&#x27;s nothing new, but sometimes it just dawns on me how socially accepted all this trickery has become...
评论 #24068462 未加载
amanaplanacanal将近 5 年前
&gt; There&#x27;s plenty of evidence to suggest that Google is manually making these decisions to block conservative websites<p>So show us the evidence.
评论 #24071237 未加载
评论 #24068424 未加载
paulcole将近 5 年前
&gt; As people increasingly are using search to navigate the web (as opposed to typing a URL into the address bar), this traffic increases, those people see more ads, Google makes more money.<p>Pardon my ignorance but I thought all of Googles search advertising was pay per click and not pay per impression?
评论 #24067650 未加载
评论 #24067655 未加载
rvieira将近 5 年前
Perhaps I&#x27;m reading too much into this, but perhaps a site trying to seriously discuss bias against Breitbart shouldn&#x27;t use :ok: as a favicon.
dundarious将近 5 年前
invidio.us appears to be shutting down, which is a shame, as I was happy to learn there was a sort of startpage.com for youtube.
评论 #24068439 未加载
mgkimsal将近 5 年前
&quot;If you believe in a free and open internet then you have to agree this is wrong.&quot;<p>I don&#x27;t have to agree. Perhaps it was &#x27;wrong&#x27; before that Breitbart ranked as high as they did earlier.<p>I can still go to Breitbart.com - no one is stopping me from going there. No one is stopping them from setting up their servers, hosting their content, and doing all that stuff. They don&#x27;t get as much &#x27;free&#x27; exposure via google as they used to. Other sites now get more visibility. So what? If BB kept their &#x27;visibility&#x27; in the search index, every search result they show up in is taking space from a different site that might have shown up instead. Why are they owed anything from google? Google changes their algorithms, and there&#x27;s more content to compete with too.<p>If we make some sort of assumption that google&#x27;s algorithms get modified or perhaps simply adapt to the audience&#x27;s searches, perhaps... there&#x27;s less appetite for Breitbart content and ideas across google&#x27;s user base, and them ranking lower <i>years down the road</i> isn&#x27;t some grand left-wing conspiracy, but a company serving the needs and desires of its users?
评论 #24068488 未加载
评论 #24071246 未加载
johnnujler将近 5 年前
Withdraw unto yourself and your immediate&#x2F;close community.
评论 #24068693 未加载
ezluckyfree将近 5 年前
this is some pretty enlightened centrist content