Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:06:00 PST Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100224/0138408282.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100224/0138408282.shtml sue Google over getting either dropped from Google's index, or simply ranked really low on certain searches. And, of course, for some there are always totally unsubstantiated conspiracy theories about Google purposely "punishing" a company or individual it doesn't like. To date, however, there's been no evidence at all that Google acts in such a capricious manner when it comes to rankings. If the company did so, and it ever came out, the hit to Google's reputation would be something fierce. It's even more ridiculous when you consider that all of the accusations of such personal attacks seem to come from tiny companies -- hardly any kind of threat to Google, anyway.

That said, if you want even more evidence that Google's ranking decisions aren't personal, but actually are based on what its system feels will give the best possible results, witness the story of Google employee Jason Morrison, who recently discovered that his own personal site had be delisted from Google. It actually took him a few weeks to notice this, but once he did, and dug into the issue (using Google's public tool and his own site's admin tools) he quickly realized that he had made a mistake that caused Google's crawlers to believe that his site was no longer up.

Now, that certainly doesn't preclude the possibility that Google takes revenge on sites it doesn't like, but it's at least more evidence that the ranking system really is pretty algorithmically focused -- and even Google employees aren't immune to being delisted for screwing up. If your site gets delisted from Google, it's not personal.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> it-ain't-personal http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100224/0138408282 Mon, 12 May 2008 13:39:00 PDT Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080511/1424241077.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080511/1424241077.shtml huge boondoggle for telcos, who keep getting more and more money out of it, with almost no oversight into what's done with that money. And, the way it's set up, it actually blocks more innovative (and cheaper!) services from being used to improve connectivity in rural areas. It's good to see others are beginning to notice this. News.com is running an article from Gregory L. Rosston at Stanford who points out that the USF rewards companies for being the least efficient providers. That is, by showing how much more it costs the telcos to provide for rural users, the FCC grants them even more money. In other words, the less efficient they are, the more money they get. Not exactly the type of incentives the FCC should be setting up -- but given FCC chair Kevin Martin's super chummy relationship with the telcos, perhaps it's no surprise.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> questions,-questions,-questions http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080511/1424241077 Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:10:03 PDT Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080314/090224542.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080314/090224542.shtml pointing out that the Kevin Martin and the FCC's opinion on certain subjects seems to change over the same issue depending on whether the issue deals with cable companies or telcos. For Martin, it seems the telcos can do no wrong, and the cable co's can do no right. Comcast has finally had enough and has sued the FCC over the questionable 30% cap that Martin proposed last year soon after granting yet another huge telco merger. Even worse, the 30% cap seems to have been based on questionable data and without any reasonable justification. It seems punitive more than anything else. Comcast is hoping that Martin will now have to explain himself in court.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> no-surprise-there http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080314/090224542 Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:25:59 PST Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080109/115328.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080109/115328.shtml regulating cable while deregulating telcos. He clearly has a very close relationship with the telcos, and never seems to question their motives. That came to a head last month when Martin pushed forward plans to cap cable growth despite serious questions about the FCC's authority in the matter (as well as questions about cherry picking statistics to support his case). It seems that all of that has now caught the attention of Congress, who is going to launch an investigation of the FCC's rulemaking process, and examine accusations of favoritism. Seeing as this is a Congressional investigation, it's likely to be a lot more grandstanding than anything substantial. However, at the very least, it looks like Congress is making it clear to Martin that he may have pushed his luck one too many times.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> whoops http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20080109/115328