ya, you're right, google probably just ignored your robots.txt... yeesh.
if some other site on the web has linked to your page, a robots.txt will not help you. robots.txt will stop the bot from spidering around your site, but if you think someone from the outside world might link to it, you need a noarchive tag on every page you don't want archived.
altavista has no magic technology to know what pages you don't want indexed either, so enjoy using it, but don't get confused.
they choose their stories based on political bias, delete posts they don't like, kick/ban you if you post opinions they don't like, and consistently ignore news stories worthy of note, based on whims. not for the open source minded individual, or even plain ole open minded.
and they often post things that have already been on slashdot for days, what's your point?
All I know is, there was a storm the other week in Ontario, and our cable went out, the only station I got was off of the airwaves, that being a local CBC affiliate.
What commercial do I see when I finally find the only non-fuzzy station on the television? - one from my cable provider laughing at the idiots with satellites who's signal goes down in a storm.
I sat there, with no cable tv, and no Internet (cablemodem down too) gritting my teeth, knowing the gods of Irony would soon shine on my fortune.
Then I read a book. Sweet release.
I simply dread the day when my ISP and my TVsp is also my electricitySP.
Yahoo has owned FAST (Alltheweb.com), Inktomi and Altavista for a while now, so it's been more than obvious for a full year that they would be dropping Google for their SERPS (search engine results pages).
Everyone at google knew this, even those with their hands on the money, and planning the IPO. The question is this, would losing Yahoo affect the revenue potential of Google's other ventures?
The flat answer is no.
Yahoo paid google a nice fee for using google technology, but it doesn't compare to the money google is making off of their advertising models. Yahoo does not show Google ads on their SERPS, so google isn't losing any pageviews of its advertisements. Google is losing nothing but a flat fee that it cares little about anymore.
Both adwords and adsense, Google's two main advertising and money producing ventures are completely independent of Yahoo and always have been. They will now be directly copied by Yahoo in an ugly attempt to start making money intelligently, many years late.
wicked, so now we can all think that we're paying for the music we're stealing, and steal more of it, guilt free.
till we ensure that we leave SOCANs left foot bleeding, right hand smoking.
Re:so cool
on
iPod-Jacked
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
so, what does this have to do with the ipod? we've had walkmen for 20 years or so, but now it's socially acceptable to walk up to someone and listen to their music?
why, because they're rich enough to own an ipod so they're trustable?
Any area of psychology can contain good psychology. Good psychology comes down to two things:
1) where the money comes from (i.e. intention of the researchers)
2) if an effect size was predetermined
1 is very traceable and leads to interesting results researching research. 2 is very sadly, very rare.
I hate the field. Most of it is grant money motivated crap. But at the same time, there is no methodology in the world better for gaining real insight into behaviour, and nothing I'd rather study.. if I could study what I want. Which I couldn't. good thing i got that comp degree too.
it's complete bull to say that tape to tape piracy is comparable to online digital piracy - tape to tape meant you were with the person you were giving it to, listening to it with them, talking about the artist. That's called effective word of mouth advertising. That's not what the Internet is today, at all.
people rip off full albums from artists that are barely scraping by, indiscriminately. Young people who have been raised on nothing but this have absolutely no moral compass on the issue. and it *is* an issue that requires some moral compass.
Yahoo now owns : Altavista, Overture, alltheweb (FAST), Inktomi
Google owns: google
MS owns: MSN
so at the moment, the entire crawler based SE market is owned entirely by Google and Yahoo - no, teoma doesn't count. MSN is in the process of developing their own crawler based engine, but I don't expect anything stellar.. they'll eventually just buy someone elses.. mabye at that point teoma will count (it would if it had any traffic, which is all msn can provide)
it used to be, for the first few months of google news' existence, that you could check the cached copy of the news article as it was fed to google.
this isn't what ppl think. the cached copy todays post is referring to here is the google search engine cached copy, the one spidered by the crawling bot.
About two months ago google stopped access to the google news direct cache. You could request the cache for a document the same way you always did, with a cache:url.tld/blah.html, but you had to do it from the newsDOT server, which the toolbar did not default to. In effect if you 'checked the cache' on a news story it would redirect you to wwwDOT instead of newsDOT and tell you no such document exists. a simple rewrite of the subdomain, and pow, a plain text cache of how the news story was fed to google.
I have to say, in the couple of months that we had access to this, information watching was a whole new field. I personally came across more than a handful of articles that were pulled within 24 hours by the newspapers in question. Crazy interesting. no tinfoil involved.
straight from someone whos never tried or needed to do anything more than play a game cd or mp3 on their computer.
ever try recording on your awe 32? hardly awe inspiring.
sound cards have a long way to come. go to a home studio with any amount of funk and you'll see about 20k worth of things that have yet to be included on your sound card.
You don't need them, you never will. You're not the be all and end all of needs.
Google, when it's 'reading' a page, is having a bot spider it. If google is spidering a page and comes across a link to a page it has not 'read', then it follows the link, spiders the page, and includes it in the index.
As for returning results to the 'unread page' based on the context of the link, what do you mean by 'returned results to the page'? Do you mean, is now capable of displaying that page in its results set for a specific query?
You *might* mean that a 'freshbot', which is googlebot's little bro, can go and pick up a new page and temporarily add it to the google index for the month, without calclulating its true PageRank (it waits until after the next update, so it can compair the new page to everything else in context).
in this sense an 'unread' page could mean a page that is not properly indexed yet, but is a new addition.
It's true that google can return a page in its results that don't have the search phrase on it, if that search phrase has been used to point to the page in question, but it doesn't mean google hasn't 'read' the page in question, it has.
but google does not return pages in its results set that it hasn't spidered, and has only seen the links to. If google sees a link, it goes and indexes the page.
what are you talking about? implemented both, you havent implemented google's algo.. sheesh.
the parent to this guys post is wrong, and not 'generally correct' as you put it (no, google does NOT differentiate hubs/portals within PageRank) so where are you coming from?
PR is calculated independent of query. it's an overall rating of the relationship of a *specific page* of a site, to the rest of the pages in the google index that are related to the same theme (themes may be defined ultimately by queries, but are independent of any specific ones).
this sentence: "The above tells us the following: That Kuro5hin and Slashdot have high pageranks not because of their excessive numbers of outlinks, but because many people point to their frontpages. Similarly, these high PageRanks mean that people that Slashdot or Kuro5hin point to get higher scores as well."
is correct. PR transference works this way. Outgoing links are in fact important, but not nearly as much as incoming links.
I did a joint CS / Psychology degree at a Canadian liberal arts school..
Wasn't the brightest in the comp sci camp, but got a couple of A's because I can string sentences together. There were a lot of A's (bright kids... half girls almost!)
Was close to the brightest in the psych department, but by 3rd and 4th year, if there were any A's handed out in a psychology class it was the EXCEPTION.
I could count the A's on two hands that the entire psychology department gave on midterms/presentations in my last year of school.
Psych profs at my school didn't give an A to a student unless they learned something from the student... and most psychologists think they know it all.
with the exception of that neuropsych prof who gave every pretty girl a high grade. boy did he bug me (fortunately for my paper, the mistook my name for a girls name, so bam. A)
"foreigners have a hard time differenciating between the bills"
ya you wish it was the foreigners problem.
Last time I was in the states (Vegas of all places, where you'd think they value the money) I got change for a $100 when I actually paid with a $20...
but you guys do love to bash everyone else huh.. seriously, none of you have ever screwed up on your currency? no mix up at the corner store with red eyes and hands full of chips and pop? sorry, don't believe you... not for a second. and in a dark bar? fugetaboutit.
ya don't do either. No wait, just do more.
I went to university all gung-ho for computers, realized as I was there that mind numbing programming wasn't how I wanted my brain to spend it's time, picked up a double major in CS and Psychology.. and loved it (at a liberal arts school none the less!).
Honestly guys (and gals), if I hadn't gotten the psych degree too.. I don't know if I would consider myself an educated person now. I can't stress enough how important it is to explore disciplines that are never expressed through the natural flow of information in the typical north american upbringing (the media, your parents, your peers, and your teachers). I found out that nobody at all who has a popular conception of the discipline of psychology has anything close to a true understanding of the field (of course most psychologists don't either, but thats another story) - and it really is a field that allows for some mind expansion
Now I work in the computer industry, not programming, but utilizing what I learned about computers and about humans.. DON'T GO ALL TECHNICAL, WE NEED BOTH SIDES OF YOUR BRAINS!!!
Slashdot Mirror
ya, you're right, google probably just ignored your robots.txt... yeesh.
if some other site on the web has linked to your page, a robots.txt will not help you. robots.txt will stop the bot from spidering around your site, but if you think someone from the outside world might link to it, you need a noarchive tag on every page you don't want archived.
altavista has no magic technology to know what pages you don't want indexed either, so enjoy using it, but don't get confused.
Ever heard of teoma.com or alltheweb.com?
both better than google.
I SEO for a living, I've never tricked google once. I have great rankings there, and they are deserved.
Advertising on my sites, which pull traffic from the engines, is cheaper, and more effective than buying directly from google.
Where do I lie in your messed up universe?
You mean, I might actually be able to move to rural Ireland and have high speed internet access for less than 200 dollars a month?
/ready to pack bags
lmk when it reaches the Beara peninsula.
they choose their stories based on political bias, delete posts they don't like, kick/ban you if you post opinions they don't like, and consistently ignore news stories worthy of note, based on whims. not for the open source minded individual, or even plain ole open minded.
and they often post things that have already been on slashdot for days, what's your point?
All I know is, there was a storm the other week in Ontario, and our cable went out, the only station I got was off of the airwaves, that being a local CBC affiliate.
What commercial do I see when I finally find the only non-fuzzy station on the television? - one from my cable provider laughing at the idiots with satellites who's signal goes down in a storm.
I sat there, with no cable tv, and no Internet (cablemodem down too) gritting my teeth, knowing the gods of Irony would soon shine on my fortune.
Then I read a book. Sweet release.
I simply dread the day when my ISP and my TVsp is also my electricitySP.
all you need to access it is a bomb, or, pretty much anything that explodes spectacularly.
Yahoo has owned FAST (Alltheweb.com), Inktomi and Altavista for a while now, so it's been more than obvious for a full year that they would be dropping Google for their SERPS (search engine results pages).
Everyone at google knew this, even those with their hands on the money, and planning the IPO. The question is this, would losing Yahoo affect the revenue potential of Google's other ventures?
The flat answer is no.
Yahoo paid google a nice fee for using google technology, but it doesn't compare to the money google is making off of their advertising models. Yahoo does not show Google ads on their SERPS, so google isn't losing any pageviews of its advertisements. Google is losing nothing but a flat fee that it cares little about anymore.
Both adwords and adsense, Google's two main advertising and money producing ventures are completely independent of Yahoo and always have been. They will now be directly copied by Yahoo in an ugly attempt to start making money intelligently, many years late.
always question FEMA's motivation for everything. just don't mention that you are.
oops.
wicked, so now we can all think that we're paying for the music we're stealing, and steal more of it, guilt free.
till we ensure that we leave SOCANs left foot bleeding, right hand smoking.
so, what does this have to do with the ipod? we've had walkmen for 20 years or so, but now it's socially acceptable to walk up to someone and listen to their music?
why, because they're rich enough to own an ipod so they're trustable?
mmmm smells publicity stuntlishus.
blah blah, I majored in it too.
Any area of psychology can contain good psychology. Good psychology comes down to two things:
1) where the money comes from (i.e. intention of the researchers)
2) if an effect size was predetermined
1 is very traceable and leads to interesting results researching research. 2 is very sadly, very rare.
I hate the field. Most of it is grant money motivated crap. But at the same time, there is no methodology in the world better for gaining real insight into behaviour, and nothing I'd rather study.. if I could study what I want. Which I couldn't. good thing i got that comp degree too.
it's complete bull to say that tape to tape piracy is comparable to online digital piracy - tape to tape meant you were with the person you were giving it to, listening to it with them, talking about the artist. That's called effective word of mouth advertising. That's not what the Internet is today, at all.
people rip off full albums from artists that are barely scraping by, indiscriminately. Young people who have been raised on nothing but this have absolutely no moral compass on the issue. and it *is* an issue that requires some moral compass.
shrinking.
Yahoo now owns : Altavista, Overture, alltheweb (FAST), Inktomi
Google owns: google
MS owns: MSN
so at the moment, the entire crawler based SE market is owned entirely by Google and Yahoo - no, teoma doesn't count. MSN is in the process of developing their own crawler based engine, but I don't expect anything stellar.. they'll eventually just buy someone elses.. mabye at that point teoma will count (it would if it had any traffic, which is all msn can provide)
it used to be, for the first few months of google news' existence, that you could check the cached copy of the news article as it was fed to google.
this isn't what ppl think. the cached copy todays post is referring to here is the google search engine cached copy, the one spidered by the crawling bot.
About two months ago google stopped access to the google news direct cache. You could request the cache for a document the same way you always did, with a cache:url.tld/blah.html, but you had to do it from the newsDOT server, which the toolbar did not default to. In effect if you 'checked the cache' on a news story it would redirect you to wwwDOT instead of newsDOT and tell you no such document exists. a simple rewrite of the subdomain, and pow, a plain text cache of how the news story was fed to google.
I have to say, in the couple of months that we had access to this, information watching was a whole new field. I personally came across more than a handful of articles that were pulled within 24 hours by the newspapers in question. Crazy interesting. no tinfoil involved.
thats because yahoo's search results are staight Google
straight from someone whos never tried or needed to do anything more than play a game cd or mp3 on their computer.
ever try recording on your awe 32? hardly awe inspiring.
sound cards have a long way to come. go to a home studio with any amount of funk and you'll see about 20k worth of things that have yet to be included on your sound card.
You don't need them, you never will. You're not the be all and end all of needs.
This post doesn't make sense...
Google, when it's 'reading' a page, is having a bot spider it. If google is spidering a page and comes across a link to a page it has not 'read', then it follows the link, spiders the page, and includes it in the index.
As for returning results to the 'unread page' based on the context of the link, what do you mean by 'returned results to the page'? Do you mean, is now capable of displaying that page in its results set for a specific query?
You *might* mean that a 'freshbot', which is googlebot's little bro, can go and pick up a new page and temporarily add it to the google index for the month, without calclulating its true PageRank (it waits until after the next update, so it can compair the new page to everything else in context).
in this sense an 'unread' page could mean a page that is not properly indexed yet, but is a new addition.
It's true that google can return a page in its results that don't have the search phrase on it, if that search phrase has been used to point to the page in question, but it doesn't mean google hasn't 'read' the page in question, it has.
but google does not return pages in its results set that it hasn't spidered, and has only seen the links to. If google sees a link, it goes and indexes the page.
what are you talking about? implemented both, you havent implemented google's algo.. sheesh.
the parent to this guys post is wrong, and not 'generally correct' as you put it (no, google does NOT differentiate hubs/portals within PageRank) so where are you coming from?
PR is calculated independent of query. it's an overall rating of the relationship of a *specific page* of a site, to the rest of the pages in the google index that are related to the same theme (themes may be defined ultimately by queries, but are independent of any specific ones).
this sentence:
"The above tells us the following: That Kuro5hin and Slashdot have high pageranks not because of their excessive numbers of outlinks, but because many people point to their frontpages. Similarly, these high PageRanks mean that people that Slashdot or Kuro5hin point to get higher scores as well."
is correct. PR transference works this way. Outgoing links are in fact important, but not nearly as much as incoming links.
I did a joint CS / Psychology degree at a Canadian liberal arts school..
Wasn't the brightest in the comp sci camp, but got a couple of A's because I can string sentences together. There were a lot of A's (bright kids... half girls almost!)
Was close to the brightest in the psych department, but by 3rd and 4th year, if there were any A's handed out in a psychology class it was the EXCEPTION.
I could count the A's on two hands that the entire psychology department gave on midterms/presentations in my last year of school.
Psych profs at my school didn't give an A to a student unless they learned something from the student... and most psychologists think they know it all.
with the exception of that neuropsych prof who gave every pretty girl a high grade. boy did he bug me (fortunately for my paper, the mistook my name for a girls name, so bam. A)
"foreigners have a hard time differenciating between the bills"
...
ya you wish it was the foreigners problem.
Last time I was in the states (Vegas of all places, where you'd think they value the money) I got change for a $100 when I actually paid with a $20
but you guys do love to bash everyone else huh.. seriously, none of you have ever screwed up on your currency? no mix up at the corner store with red eyes and hands full of chips and pop? sorry, don't believe you... not for a second. and in a dark bar? fugetaboutit.
ya don't do either. No wait, just do more.
I went to university all gung-ho for computers, realized as I was there that mind numbing programming wasn't how I wanted my brain to spend it's time, picked up a double major in CS and Psychology.. and loved it (at a liberal arts school none the less!).
Honestly guys (and gals), if I hadn't gotten the psych degree too.. I don't know if I would consider myself an educated person now. I can't stress enough how important it is to explore disciplines that are never expressed through the natural flow of information in the typical north american upbringing (the media, your parents, your peers, and your teachers). I found out that nobody at all who has a popular conception of the discipline of psychology has anything close to a true understanding of the field (of course most psychologists don't either, but thats another story) - and it really is a field that allows for some mind expansion
Now I work in the computer industry, not programming, but utilizing what I learned about computers and about humans.. DON'T GO ALL TECHNICAL, WE NEED BOTH SIDES OF YOUR BRAINS!!!
any why is it nobody ever publishes effect sizes anymore? ohya, the american public doesn't understand them.