So you could do if you were Google and you would have had their databases?
for a Long time I wondered what's so valuable about Google+ for Google and why are they so heavily promote. In the end, Google already tried the "social" before and many have said that Google needs to focus on its core business – the search and leave the "social" to others. But what if they had no choice? What if they really needed the socialization and needed it very badly?
This article describes a hypothetical possibility that Google+ can have major strategic value for Google in its core business – search.
Ingredients:
the
Suppose you have a search engine, and you have redefined the way people move around the Internet. Sooner or later you will find that the very Internet on which you relied when generating your index, it first begins to rot from the inside. This is a classic case, when the observer changes what observes. This cannot be avoided for two reasons:
Definitely at some point the value of the links will be so small that they will no longer be a significant input parameter for the search algorithm. You can think of many alternatives using the information found on the Internet, but what can you do else?
Then there are the clean water reflections...
An analytical tool will enable to check who was looking, but he won't tell you anything about the user. Social network will not tell you a lot about what people read, but it says something about their reputation. As a rule, people with higher status in the social network belonging to a certain professional circles, can be accepted for experts in various fields.
If you combine Analytics with a social network, we can understand what people, from which circles, and circles — this particular area of interest, you can go on which pages.
It can be used to reduce the degradation of the value of the links because it really helps to know who and how receives information. Common spam page will be closed in a fraction of a second, but if someone who is a professional in some area, I lingered on the page with the article on this area, then this is a good criterion by which to consider this article worthy.
It is difficult to decide what information from social networks, with Analytics of who visited which page and how long it was to take the input data in the algorithm. However, I'm sure you would have brought it to the end if it would help to achieve a quantum leap in the quality of search results. Such a deep analysis of this — just something that Google excels. And that's the kind of things that'd love to have this technology Google employees. I know I would ;)
In the end, there is no better tool in distinguishing bad from good content than the human mind. If attracting people to solve complex computing problems worked out for classification of images, then having a large enough user base, you can do the same with search. You only need to link what users browse with their reputation. There is another feedback loop is caused by the fact that people looking for a huge piece of information directly through Google, having access to their Analytics, which is based on a large amount of data. For example, Google can simply subtract those clicks to your sites, for which it is responsible. So remain professional communications between people (email or personal message), favorite links and user links from sites that the user (and not some algorithm) I thought it was important.
If my hypothesis is correct, it is very likely that every Google+ user is now free Google employee, whose actions affect the search results. This will explain why Google is heavily promoting Google+.
It would be great to find a way to refute it. However, one of the main reasons why I believe this is in good agreement with the latest changes in Google's privacy policy.
Article based on information from habrahabr.ru
This article describes a hypothetical possibility that Google+ can have major strategic value for Google in its core business – search.
Ingredients:
the
-
the
- Search engine linked index the
- Analyst the
- Social network the
- a Large number of servers
a Group of talented developers
Suppose you have a search engine, and you have redefined the way people move around the Internet. Sooner or later you will find that the very Internet on which you relied when generating your index, it first begins to rot from the inside. This is a classic case, when the observer changes what observes. This cannot be avoided for two reasons:
-
the
- people who had relied on the links will now rely on your search, thereby reducing the value of links the
- people who understand that you appreciate the links, will create a lot of them, thus further reducing the value of links between sites
Definitely at some point the value of the links will be so small that they will no longer be a significant input parameter for the search algorithm. You can think of many alternatives using the information found on the Internet, but what can you do else?
Then there are the clean water reflections...
An analytical tool will enable to check who was looking, but he won't tell you anything about the user. Social network will not tell you a lot about what people read, but it says something about their reputation. As a rule, people with higher status in the social network belonging to a certain professional circles, can be accepted for experts in various fields.
If you combine Analytics with a social network, we can understand what people, from which circles, and circles — this particular area of interest, you can go on which pages.
It can be used to reduce the degradation of the value of the links because it really helps to know who and how receives information. Common spam page will be closed in a fraction of a second, but if someone who is a professional in some area, I lingered on the page with the article on this area, then this is a good criterion by which to consider this article worthy.
It is difficult to decide what information from social networks, with Analytics of who visited which page and how long it was to take the input data in the algorithm. However, I'm sure you would have brought it to the end if it would help to achieve a quantum leap in the quality of search results. Such a deep analysis of this — just something that Google excels. And that's the kind of things that'd love to have this technology Google employees. I know I would ;)
In the end, there is no better tool in distinguishing bad from good content than the human mind. If attracting people to solve complex computing problems worked out for classification of images, then having a large enough user base, you can do the same with search. You only need to link what users browse with their reputation. There is another feedback loop is caused by the fact that people looking for a huge piece of information directly through Google, having access to their Analytics, which is based on a large amount of data. For example, Google can simply subtract those clicks to your sites, for which it is responsible. So remain professional communications between people (email or personal message), favorite links and user links from sites that the user (and not some algorithm) I thought it was important.
If my hypothesis is correct, it is very likely that every Google+ user is now free Google employee, whose actions affect the search results. This will explain why Google is heavily promoting Google+.
It would be great to find a way to refute it. However, one of the main reasons why I believe this is in good agreement with the latest changes in Google's privacy policy.
Комментарии
Отправить комментарий