Browsing "internet news"
The internet is an amazing place, it has pretty much anything you could possibly want on it. It has examples of every facet of humanity and culture, it will be somewhat a wonder what it’s going to look like in the next 15 years considering the leaps and bounds it has changed in the first 15 of becoming widely accessible.
You can find essentially anything online. Recipes, songs, programs, services, information, the list is inhibited only by your own imagination. But does that make what you find true? A court in Italy has recently decided that just in case it is, Google needs to filter and censor their auto complete data.
A little bit of background is probably in order. Basically someone searched for themselves on Google, and the autocomplete feature offered suggestions such as con man and fraud.
Defamation and slander will always exist in some form or another in the open world. Auto complete within Google searches is a relatively new feature, so when I read of the decision that was upheld in the Court of Milan I somewhat echoed Googles disappointed response.
It’s not up to the search engine service to censor the entirety of the internet, after all the pages which the terms were a part of still exist, are indexed and can be found when you look. This is where brand and image management come into play, if someone messes with your online image, it’s dealt with quickly and efficiently.
Perhaps this is just another strong example for anyone with prospective web ideas. Always go with the option to opt-in as opposed to opt-out. The web is experiencing it’s own version of growing pains, when you’re ready to make your tracks online just be sure you have the search experts on your side.
So in a bit of a twist of the online nature, it’s a decidedly different change in the race to the cloud so to speak. It wasn’t Google to do it, it wasn’t Microsoft, it looks like the crown for first will be going to Amazon.
Last week the online mega-sales site launched it’s Android app store, and just yesterday made an unexpected offering, Amazong Cloud Drive and Cloud Player. Interesting note, it is not iFriendly. Now it’s not the full service cloud solution that some people may be looking at exploring, but if the player and storage are stable under heavy load, it speaks well for Amazons future forays into the cloud. It starts off fairly basic, with 5GB of storage for your music enjoyment, but you’re upgraded to 20 GB of storage for the purchase of one MP3 album. Now just because it’s a cloud based music player, doesn’t mean it’s restricted, your storage space can be used for essentially anything, music, documents, photos etc.
This comes on the heels of a report that last week Google (whom many though to be the cloud leader) began testing it’s own online music services. The introduction of the Amazon player however isn’t so much a thorn in Googles side, as it is a boon to it’s Android software. Music has been an issue for the devices, and now with Amazon offering their own storage and player, and a strong relationship with Android app marketplace already, it wouldn’t be a surprise to find Google and Amazon shaking hands to make some ends meet.
The implements which are used by a trade expert or even a novice user to reach the end goal, the tools of the trade are most often key to the process of creation or discovery. It’s extremely rare when a person gets in trouble for using their tools to do their job, and it’s even rarer when they’re penalized heavily for it.
And yet, that’s exactly what an Italian court has decided to do, well sort of. Their first ruling this year was in regards to Youtube and their decision that the website is effectively a television station and as such needs to follow the same rules on them. Pinning the responsibility on Google to monitor the content being delivered to the country. Okay, so a couple of ip filters (very basic example) and they’d be good to go with Youtube maybe.
The Italian court however, has recently handed down a verdict on the realm of search. In one case in particular, Yahoo was found guilty for containing links which the court determined allowed copyright infringement. The same case however, was not brought up to Googles legal team, so that’s a little odd there. Also somewhat interesting, Yahoo doesn’t power it’s organic search anymore, it’s handled by Microsoft Bing. So if Yahoo (rightfully) passes the responsibilities to Microsoft, and they don’t take care of it, then does Yahoo get left out in the rain? Too broad a decision at best and leaves too much interpretation to the imagination. But then, things really get strange.. you didn’t think it stopped there did you?
Back to my tools to do the job analogy, Google, Yahoo and Bing all share near identical traits. The greatest of which is being a search tool for users to find their destination. Whether it’s a purchase, research, gaming or what have you. Search engines don’t create websites, they don’t create videos or publish webpages, they gatherm collate, and provide information as it’s requested by it’s users.
On to the weird stuff. This same court decided that users of AdWords platforms, could not be held liable for bidding on copyrighted terms for their ad spaces. Paid search advertising will not be held accountable for the terms used to place in search. Clear as mud then. Organic search results however, can be penalized under this new ruling. It’s not like Google, Bing and Yahoo are hiring massive development teams to create pages full of trademarked or copyrighted terms just to screw up the results and businesses. By this Italian court ruling however, they’re saying essentially that. Personally, I’ll be surprised if the ruling on search holds any water for more than a few days at most, it’s almost like the court has never used search to understand that it’s just a tool, not a content creator.
Some interesting points in the news for the day, a game of copycat, a story about stories and a trending term late in the day, GaGa going Google.
When it comes to playing copycat, the internet made it almost second nature to find an idea, make a change or two and launch it as your very own. And almost never have the world know better. But this version has to do with Yahoo and it’s own iteration of the Google Instant search tool. It’s not a revolutionary shift in the way search will be conducted on the web, but for the users of the Yahoo search portal it fits into their mantra of search by click. As you type your search into their search box, it’ll give you the drop down list of anticipated searches. It’s limitation however, dwells within being tied to the Yahoo engine, the anticipated searches are limited to Yahoo categories.
A story about stories that has made the rounds has to do with Google as well today. A judge has essentially told Google that no, you can not digitize the worlds books. The search giant had reached an agreement with publishers and authors late last year with a payment to reimburse the creators of the works. Federal judge Denny Chin was quoted as saying of the idea: “..would grant Google significant rights to exploit entire books, without the permission of the copyright owners. Indeed, the Amended Settlement Agreement would give Google a significant advantage over competitors, rewarding it for engaging in wholesale copyrighted works without permission, while releasing claims well beyond those presented in the case.” Where this will be going in the near future is completely up in the air for the moment, as is the future and longevity of untold amounts of orphaned pieces literature.
As for Gaga going to Google, she answered some fan questions, cracked some jokes and had a generally good time. You can find her video on Youtube, it’s an interesting view of the most searched artist who leveraged the power of the web, social media and online marketing to become a music sensation.
In what’s sure to be a precedent utilized around the world, Google and their Street View product has been absolved of any wrong doing. Well, in Germany that is for the time being.
A court in Berlin has rendered the verdict of basically not guilty of infringing on personal privacy because the pictures from the cars are taken from the street and not the sidewalk. A number of the claimants used the fact that the cameras were mounted so high up on the cars they could see over privacy fences and the court told them in short, to just opt out as 240,000 other Germans already had.
The way which German courts are laid out, this is a final decision in thhe matter for Germany, but it hasn’t affected global matters as of yet. Perhaps for the moment, all eyes will turn to France and their courts as news of the German verdict was handed out, French courts levied a fine of $141,000 against Google.
Since it’s inception and it’s growth to become the go to search engine for the majority of internet users, Google has tweaked, modified, upgraded and changed the way you search continually. Under the hood that is, the algorithm has been tweaked so many times it barely resembles that innocent little spiderbot that began it’s journey 10+ years ago.
Every time that they make a change in the coding, or an indexing priority change it effects the search results page and it’s relevance for the users. Last year for example in order to speed up the experience of search, Google implemented the Caffeine update which indexed and cached pages faster than ever before. Doubling the experience with Google Instant they brought the average search down to less than 10 seconds for the average user. The most recent major change was the Panda or Farmer update which was put into play to try and exlude major content farms and spammy websites from search results.
And a new shift which is underway, which only Google knows will take place, Google is currently reevaluating the relevancy weight that’s given to keyword rich domain names. In a short video blog, Matt Cutts discusses a few differences between domains in that you can go differing ways in search. With a brandable name, or with a keyword rich domain. And while there’s something to be said for having a keyword rich domain, it also needs to be pointed out that more often than not, brandable urls and company names prevail online. Take Twitter for example, you wouldn’t search for twitter by using social micro blogging site, you’d type twitter in the search bar, or even just directly into the address bar.
So just to be a little more clear in what Google has admitted they’re currently working on. They’re analysing the relevance of keyword rich urls to ensure they’re delivering proper results. And they’re going to be adjusting the level of relevance they give to keyword rich domains. Bear this in mind when the next SEO “expert” you speak to, who’s working from his basement or garage urges to you that you need to have a url with your keywords in it. Because after all is said and done, what’s in a name?
An advertising metric which has become more and more available for business owners to use has been social search. Facebook, MySpace to a degree, and mobile access to these online communities comprises a network of millions of people; both locally and beyond. Google is by far the king of search online, but Facebook recently has put a twist on the angle of social search. In October of 2004 Facebook applied to patent what was called “curated search” but for all intent and purpose is social search. As of this past February, the patent was granted.
The language of the filing is as such: “Visual tags for search results generated from social network information.”
If that seems somewhat broad and far reaching, you’re not alone. Digging through the information contained within the patent application it’s explained more thoroughly. Here is the definition of search via Facebooks patent application:
“A key metric in evaluating the performance of search engines is relevance of the search results. Search engine developers are always striving to deliver search results that are relevant to the search query being processed. A frequently used technique is analyzing how web pages link to each other. A web page gets a ranking boost based on the number of other web pages that are linked to it. Click-through rates of search results are analyzed in some search engines. The general rule is: the higher the click-through rate, the higher the ranking.”
And their definition of social search is defined as well.
“According to an embodiment of the invention, search results, including sponsored links and algorithmic search results, are generated in response to a query, and are ranked based on the frequency of clicks on the search results by members of social network who are within a predetermined degree of separation from the member who submitted the query.”
The idea is that relevance is dependant partly on the number of clicks your friends give to links, as well as how closely tied you are to your friends. The awarding of the patent likely won’t vastly alter the social search game, it does prove however that Zuckerberg had search in mind the entire time for Facebook; the company was launched in February of 2004, the application made only a few months later in October.
And the winner is? Mozilla and Chrome browsers at last weeks Pwn2Own web security conference. Internet Explorer 8 as well as Safari web browser were hacked within the first few days of the contest which tests browsers and internet security. Neither the Chrome browser nor the Mozilla Firefox browser were breached as teams who signed up to tackle the browsers withdrew as they failed to come up with a technique to exploit them. It’s Firefoxs first “win” at the event and Chromes third year of survival.
Both surviving browsers: open source, have bounty programs, have embedded security teams, better at faster fixes. Co-incidence?
via Chris Evans Twitter, a Chrome security engineer
Mobile browsers were also targeted and all fell to the exploits which researchers found, Google however was the first to offer a fix for the exploit which was addressed.
The contest doesn’t mean that you’re completely unsecured using IE 8 as your dedicated browser, or that by using Chrome and Firefox you’re completely protected from malicious attempts at snagging your data. The researchers at the Pwn2own event dedicate a fair amount of time and resources into breaking or hacking a specific browser, all with the intent of passing on their methods and thinking to the manufacturer so they can be patched.
So there’s this thing called the internet and people are able to create their own little slice of it to tell their story or maybe even to sell themselves! It’s an amazing tool, sadly it bears the responsibility of granting anonymity to those using it, and as such it’s becoming more and more crowded with imprudent users. Massive sites of good, bad and just plain terrible information. Sometimes it seems that no matter what you want to find, you can’t help but have dozens of trash and spam results to filter through to find those nuggets of wisdom.
Well, Google has listened to your cries for spam control. And with their recent Panda (Farmer) update, it’s helped clean up as much as 12% of the overall searches performed with the service. When you’re talking in the billions of searches per month, 12% turns out to be a rather significant number. And yet, that still leaves 88% of the searches performed which may still be plagued by spam sites, scraper sites and poor quality sites. Well, Google has listened again, and now even more control of your personal search experience has emerged.
Now as you perform a search, a new option to shape your experience, block all results has been implemented. It may sound like it’s just too simple, but it does in fact allow users to form their own modified algorithm of sorts. Not interested in E-How.com? You can now choose to block those results from your searches. After you’ve blocked a url, simply reenter your search terms and voila! Cleansed and purged from your future results.
The search engines are in the business of bringing you, the user, what you want from the web. The added amenities that they provide, whether it be maps, documents, pictures, or Facebook integrations are bonuses designed to help further shape and enhance your user experience. Just like the new feature of blocking searched sites with Google.
In a little shown display of power, Google excercized it’s mobile muscle on it’s Android operating system over the last few days. It came to the attention of the mobile team of malicious software being made available on the market, and they quickly stepped in to isolate and destroy the offending apps.
What they did next, was show how much control that they have remotely to your Android software. I’ve read estimates that tens of thousands of users were affected by the software, and with the flick of a switch, Google removed the software from the infected devices. They remotely uninstalled the software from the handsets and for a final resolution recommend resetting the phones to factory default for good measure.