66
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 May 2024
66 points (85.9% liked)
worldnews
3755 readers
57 users here now
Welcome!
We strive for high-quality standards on the latest world events.
The basis of these standards comes from the MBFC, which uses an aggregate of methodologies, including the IFCN and World Freedom Indices, to rate the Bias and Factual Reporting of News.
Does your post fit the standards? Check this thread!
Rules:
Rule 1: No Further Gaza/Israel war posts
Rule 2: No US internal news/US politics
Rule 3: Editorials, opinions, analysis, blogs, gifs, memes, etc non-serious news sources
Rule 4: Non-English articles require a translation in the post or comments (mark the title with the source language eg. [FR] for French)
Rule 5: Petitions, advocacy, surveys
Rule 6: All-caps titles
Rule 7: Old news (≥ 1-Month-old) articles
Rule 8: Unlabeled NSFW images/videos
Rule 9: URL shorteners
- The general rules of the sh.itjust.works instance apply!
Thank you.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Nah, I think the solution is simpler: multiple competing algorithms. Gaming one system is pretty easy, gaming 5 isn't. So if a search company wants to always have the top results, they need to swap between a handful of good search algorithms to keep SEO hunters at bay.
Hiring experts is certainly a good idea, but due to the sheer size of the internet, it's not going to be feasible.
As for the original discussion about censorship in search, I take it to mean intentional hiding or demotion of relevant results due to the content of those results. SEO spam isn't relevant because it's not what the customer is likely wanting, so hiding/demoting it doesn't count as censorship imo.