Google to use TrustRank for News, Possibly More
mike slaven writes "In a follow-up to Tuesday's post about Google registering a trademark on the term TrustRank, an article on NewScientist explains how Google plans to track the credibility of news sources. The article also mentions that the patent on TrustRank is not limited to ranking just news stories: 'The patent also reveals that the same system could be roped in to rank other search results, not simply news. So sales and services could in the future be listed on the basis of price and the reputation of the company involved.'"
Can we know this for sure? Has google confirmed it? What is the trustrank of newscientist.com ?
1. Google
2. Apple
3. Firefox
4. Your Rights are being stolen!
5. Microsoft sucks.
Rinse. Repeat.
Windows isn't the answer... it's the question. NO is the answer!
Yes, bow to Our skunk protocol. You will give us your food, or we'll raise git on Our handstand and point our tail at you as the O'reilly spotted skunk found only in the most dense Amazon.com forests of the United Nigerian estates of America.
If anyone is willing to accept these money orders, may you send me a laptop computer? The one I am using is falling to peices. Please contact me at Muabobu Mitchel "MM20012127@gmail.com", and I'll send you the money orders after you send two DELL laptops to 342 Voodoo, Pignuts, Nigeria Republic.
algorithm (v, tr) - a sequence of operations to perform a task (modern, from "Al Gore, Rhythm", Albert Gore Jr (1946-?) being a popular politician and American Vice President (1992-2000) reknowned for his command of logic, co-joined with "Rhythm" to infer repetition.)
foxnews.com just disappeared entirely from the Internet.
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
... didn't Al Franken write that book already?
--- Attorneys Assisting Citizen-Soldiers & Families -
Did they copyright "TrustRank" or "TrustRank Beta"?
Too much work. It's just easier to do what Google tells me to do.
Slashdot takes a lot of articles and stories from a large number of websites, the editors check them for errors and ensure quality. In theory at least. ;)
It is a lot easier for Google to index one site than to hand pick articles from all over the web, and do the editing and quality control themselves.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
IF author = 'Enderle' THEN TRUST=ZILCH AND BONEHEAD = 1.
IF author = 'DiDio' THEN TRUST=NADA AND MICROSOFT_SHILL = 1
IF topic = 'SCO' THEN RELEVENCE TO ANYONE = RELEVANCE TO ANYONE - 1000
IF quoted_source = 'Marc Andressen' THEN WHO_FUCKING_CARES = 1
IF news_organization = 'FOX' then BULLSHIT_IS_AFOOT = 1.
So, if the TLA is Obviously Fscked Up, does that make it TOFU?
I worry about stuff like that...
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Just two stories later, 'Your Rights Online: The SCO Trial Through A New Lens'.
l ?tid=123&tid=136&tid=88&tid=155
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/05/04/29/1950245.shtm
I'll probably be modded down for this...