- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- ghazi@lemmy.blahaj.zone
You must log in or register to comment.
Yes. They both did.
Google came to prominence because it sidestepped the first gen SEO of keywords.
Then it became a bloated corp run by MBAs.
SEO took off and it did little to nothing as its search platform was now there to deliver eye balls to advertisers.
I noticed something was wrong when every article repeated what I was asking as many times as possible.
They’re all pretty much written in the same style now, and it’s next to impossible to find the actual information you’re looking for under all the bullshit.
I don’t blame SEO ‘experts’ or Google. I blame greed.
right, we’re all guilty – not the powers that be that enabled it in the first place with the sole aim of fleecing the masses
Does anyone ever talk about how we can fix it?
I started using Kagi. By paying for the search engine, at least I can ensure the search engine’s goals align with mine, instead of with whoever pays most for advertisement. I haven’t used it for a long time yet, but so far I’m satisfied with its results!
I’ve been using Kagi for about half a year now, and I’ve definitely been very happy with it. As you pointed out, the fact that you pay for it with actual money and not with your attention (ie. ad views) means that they actually have an incentive to show you good results instead of endless walls of spammy links that lead to pages using their ad network.
People don’t seem to realize that Google’s not a search engine company with an ad network, but an ad network company with a search engine: the ads pay for all of Google’s services, so they’re incentivized to fill your search results with bullshit that you have to dig through, but that uses their ad network – every useless spam link you have visit when looking for the thing you actually searched for means more 💰 for Google.
The fact that so many big online services are ad-funded has led to the situation where people seem to believe that we’re entitled to have everything for free online. While open source projects run by volunteers are definitely a thing (as is obvious considering where we are), I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume that every online service should have rely on voluntary donations and volunteer work, and that developers should work on your free pet service during their time off from their actual work
Yikes.
What’s “yikes” about that?
It sounds like you’re being taken advantage of without realizing it and trying to get others to do the same.
How on earth does paying for a service mean someone’s “being taken advantage of”? You do realize that Google, Bing et al aren’t actually free? The whole problem with eg. Google is the fact that they’re an ad company with a search engine and not the other way around, which creates perverse incentives to show you bullshit results as long as it means more ad views for them (and they control both the supply and demand side of that ad network, which makes it even worse). That’s literally the reason why Google’s results have gotten so bad.
While I’d love to live in an economic system where people could just build good web search engines for free and on a volunteer basis, unfortunately we don’t find ourselves in such a system at this time. I’d rather pay for a search service than use one that’s incentivized to not show me what I’m searching for, and I’d also rather pay for developer time than assume that they’ll work on services for free during their time off (which is the reality with eg. Lemmy admins)
I don’t have a ton of experience with it yet, but I don’t have to scroll through a bunch of actual ads, followed by a bunch of not-really-but-basically-still ads, before finding what I’m looking for.
I’m paying for the service, not because I just fell for their marketing, but because I actually have the impression of getting noticeably less “polluted” results, especially when searching for something easily advertisable (e.g. “best X to buy 2023”). I don’t need to convert anyone else. Everyone can just try it themselves and judge whether they feel it’s worth their money or not. As of now, for me it seems to be the case.
Use different services.
We’re already in the process of fixing it by using Lemmy instead of reddit.
Something that has been SEO’d for Google is still going to feature prominantly on ddg or bing. There are other reasons to switch off Google, but seo isn’t going to stop being a problem.
I think it’s not in our hand. We can only hide annoyances by a content blocker.
SEO experts AND GOOGLE
Unregulated capitalism did.
That article downplays SEO and mostly argues that Google is responsible, and it still gives Google way too much credit. I mean, it’s gonna take a lot more evidence to make me believe they broke the internet by accident, for one. People knew all this crap would happen before Google was even a thing.
Yes.
Perhaps this is why nearly everyone hates SEO and the people who do it for a living: the practice seems to have successfully destroyed the illusion that the internet was ever about anything other than selling stuff.
Ah, the author is young. Many of us remember the Internet before e-commerce.
Greed of both SEO and Google.
It was the battle between SEO “experts” and Google that did it.
I think this 8000+ word article’s length is indicative of the “real” answer: it’s complicated.
I read the whole thing. Lots of great personalities and examples spanning from AltaVista to Large Language models and everything in between.
I think the quote that resonated with me the most, to summarize this article’s main thesis in a sound bite, was this:
You can’t just be the most powerful observer in the world for two decades and not deeply warp what you are looking at
In essence, it’s the fault of having a dominant algorithm dictating what the Internet “is”. Google is the tool most people use for most of their information seeking. Thus, getting a high ranking from Google is the difference between success and failure.
imho, the only real solution is decentralization. Federated services, local newspapers, new search engines, idk.
And yet, Google is still my default search engine. So I’m part of the problem.
What strikes me is that Google doesn’t fix some of the blatant offenders. For example, the other day I was looking for tablets, so I seached for “best tablets of 2023”. And it’s obvious that many websites are auto-generated, that the content itself was written several years ago, and the years have magically been updated to the present. Half of the first ten links are to pages like this.
I don’t expect Google to de-list things. But I do expect that the developers would look at the top ten results for common searches like this and penalize major websites for intentionally creating deceptive content.
Similarly, I would expect all search engines to lower ratings on websites that are ad-heavy. Users want information, not sparkly ads. This is easy to detect and optimize for.
But hey, people wanna make their money, so they’ll do what they do.
It was the unholy marriage of the two
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Maybe I could even repackage such a tragedy into a sensationalized anecdote for a viral article about the people who do SEO for a living, strongly implying that nature was here to punish the bad guy while somehow also assuming the ethical high ground and pretending I hadn’t been hoping this exact thing would happen from the start.
He was the kind of tall, charming man who described himself multiple times as “a nerd,” and he pointed out that even though working directly with search engine rankings is “no longer monetizing at the highest payout,” the same “core knowledge of SEO” remains relevant for everything from native advertising to social media.
As sunset turned to dusk, I found Daron Babin again, and he started telling me about one of his signature moves, back in the ’90s, involving fake domain names: “I could make it look like it was somebody else, but it actually redirected to me!” What he and his competitors did was legal but well beyond what the dominant search engine allowed.
Unlike the Elon Musks and Jeff Bezoses of the world, who went from geeky teenagers to masters of the universe, the dorks who grew up to do SEO have stayed the butt of the joke, beholden to the fluctuations of the algorithm, frantically pulling levers behind the scenes but ultimately somewhat hapless.
Google was slow to allow someone to talk with me, possibly because of the giant PR clusterfuck that has been the company’s past year (accused by the federal government of being a monopoly; increasingly despised by the public; losing ground to Reddit, TikTok, and large language models), so I decided to start by meeting up with a chipper, charismatic man named Duane Forrester.
Once he represented Bing, Forrester more or less stopped drinking at conferences, as had long been the case for his counterpart at Google, an engineer named Matt Cutts, who helped build and then ran the company’s web spam team before stepping back in 2014 and leaving in 2016.
The original article contains 8,379 words, the summary contains 336 words. Saved 96%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
You saved 96%, but the result still seems quite fluffy. Perhaps this kind of article is more challenging to summarize.