05:06 am
Any chance I'll ever meet someone that can fit this profile? I mean, is it so wrong to want a woman who can simultaneously target two silvered pistols while flipping through a doorway?
Any chance I'll ever meet someone that can fit this profile? I mean, is it so wrong to want a woman who can simultaneously target two silvered pistols while flipping through a doorway?
Fascinating bits about a vulnerability in Google's algorithm for ranking pages here, in this discussion of Google Bombs. I'm not really sure how I feel about it, frankly. I mean, on the one hand, the power of millions of blogs (and LiveJournals) on the web-as-environment is staggering ... but on the other, Google's PageRank algorithm is giving an accurate picture of exactly what its designed to represent, that is, the abstract dataspace not only of what is objectively in a page, but what others linking to it say about it.
If 30,000 people linked to my LJ page with the link-text "useless pedophillic sod," then that phrase in Google would bring my page up nearly every time in the top ten. Is that incorrect, though? Google makes no claim of objective accuracy, but instead is a distillate of the abstract space of textual representation. If your city is called "Sumphole" on the state geographic maps, that doesn't mean it is a sumphole, only that "sumphole" is what its been tagged with.
In a sense, this is an excellent lesson to the web-living public, a warning about not confusing the map with the medium.
| ← Previous day | (Calendar) | Next day → |