This is funny. I saw a number of folks from Google at various parties tonight (Web 2 is about to start) and they were buzzing about this…
But if Google designed for Google, then, who would be Google?
I think I’ll have to ask Steve Ballmer and Mark Zuckerberg that question. Maybe Randall Stephenson, of AT&T….
Designing Google For LinkBait
This is funny. I saw a number of folks from Google at various parties tonight (Web 2 is about to start) and they were buzzing about this… But if Google designed for Google, then, who would be Google? I think I'll have to ask Steve Ballmer and Mark Zuckerberg…
10 thoughts on “Designing Google For LinkBait”
hmmm…not quite complete. the page needs adsense and google custom search to finish optimizing!
i was hanging out w/some google folks this evening as well, and they all took it with good humor. there was a good undercurrent that went something like “huh, i’ve never really considered what it would be like (trying to optimize for google)”. not sure it will, but hopefully this self-actualization might help simplify life for us little guys. maybe they will introduce something like yahoo’s paid inclusion where we can simply buy top results in algo (wait, that can’t be right, paid inclusion can’t influence where we rank…can it?!? 🙂
i know the fella who created this little firestorm of self-actualization at google, and no surprise, he knows a little about SEO from real life experience, both at digital impact helping clients w/SEO and from optimizing his new site (www.kango.com)
LOL! Time to fly south!!
If Google designed for Google who would be Google? What an existential question. the answer is “Its Turtles All the way down”!
BTW: maybe these guys are lookin’ to get acquired?
ah, when I wrote that meangene ranked #9 (sounds like John Lennon, eh? 😉
more web 2 search stats:
66% of the links on the “top 100” news.google.com results on:
>> web-2.0 OR web-2 summit http://asinine.ws
oops — human error!! :O
CORRECTION: 38% (23/60) of the publications account for 79% (140/177) of the links
ps: in any case — it appears to be a skewed distribution (somewhat like what might be expected according to Bradford’s Law). I was under the impression that Google’s results were supposed to “group” multiple listings (rather than to list several copies from the same domain. On average, there appear to be more than 6X (140/23) as many links from the multiply listed sources than from sources which are listed only once. FASCINATING! ;D
one mo’ time!
apparently Google’s advanced news algorithm is all of a sudden returning erratic results (at least for me it’s virtually nothing — like 1 or 2 sites ;). If somebody would like a copy of the results returned earlier today (12:45 CET), you can contact me via Facebook’s “domain names” group.
I and My Camping Mall (http://www.mycampingmall.com) belong to both Facebook and MySpace. There is a lot of crossover. Google shouldn’t have a problem setting up a new social network because many of the members of those two networks would just register with Google, plus Google would have its own following. Don’t believe Google needs their blessing.
Google has just added Pay per Impression Option to Adwords – as well as removed the entire hyperlinked box from the Sponsor links
Speaking of Facebook vs. MySpace, I hear a rumor that MySpace is in financial trouble and could declare banruptcy. Any truth to that?