Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

234 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

err (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036131)

So why is this even an issue?

Re:err (0)

Pi3.142 (538027) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036135)

No Its not an issue, but NEWS FOR NERDS.

First Google search result for "douche" (-1)

Roto-Rooter Man (520267) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036291)

Keeping Clean, Douche My husband is a Muslim man...He washes every time that he uses the "facilities", and requires that I do the same. I have no problem with this. I find that I like it. However, he now is insisting that I "douche" every night before bed... I am uncomfortable with this practice, and have read much against it... He claims that his Mother and sisters do, and that it is my duty to him, to remain as clean as possible... Please help me. I want to please my husband, but I don't want to risk my health doing it. Is there a solution? Reply Washing after using the "facilities" is a part of the Islamic law. However, "douching" before retiring for the day, it may be a personal preference, is not a requirement of the Islamic law. If you do not feel comfortable with it, then I would suggest that you communicate your feelings to your husband. Trying to "remain as clean as possible" is no-doubt a great virtue. Whether or not regular "douching" entails a health hazard is a question that should be addressed to refrain from it, irrespective of your husbands preferences. The solution, in the light of the above explanation, is that it is your personal choice to carry on the practice or to discontinue douche it.

BECAUSE YOU HAVE FIRST POST!!!! (-1)

L.Torvalds (548450) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036136)

So tell me niggah, You be rollin on PHAT DUBS???

Re:BECAUSE YOU HAVE FIRST POST!!!! (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036356)

I be wollin al wight bwotha, yo!

Re:err (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036138)

they arent allowed to make too much money..

Re:err (1)

qslack (239825) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036140)

Because VA is about to unveil its own search engine with ads like Google's, and they want to know what we'll think of it.

HOLY FUCKING SHIT MY FRIEND!!!! (-1)

L.Torvalds (548450) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036143)

You .sig is has a higher fag-rating then male figure skaters. Congrats, and you may now proceed to the nearest bathouse of your choice.

Re:err (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036144)

Because Slashdot readers are idiots as usual, and Hemos needed to clarify.

Yeah, no kidding -- this is Slashdot material? (0)

Deal-a-Neil (166508) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036241)

This article isn't news for nerds. It's not even news.

Re:err (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036348)

schlong baby

deptment (0, Offtopic)

gedgod (225268) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036137)

have a look at the deptment.

Dirty Linux Hippies are Dying (-1, Offtopic)

RoboTroll (560160) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036139)

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered Dirty GNU Hippie community when last month IDC confirmed that Rancid Smelling GNU Hippies account for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all humans. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that Natty haired greasy GNU Hippie have lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Reeking Linux Hippies are collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last [sysadminmag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive /usr/bin/sh test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amdest.com] to predict the future of the Stinking sweaty Linux hippie. The hand writing is on the wall: Foul-stenched GNU hippies with swampy armpits face a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for them because they are dying. Things are looking very bad for Hairy-backed GNU hippie. As many of us are already aware, they continue to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Troll leader Anonymouse Coward states that there are 7000 goatse.cx trolls. How many ascii art trolls are there? Let's see. The number of goatse.cx versus ascii art posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 ascii art trolls. Pimply-faced GNU hippies posts on Slashdot are about half of the volume of ascii art posts. Therefore there are about 700 Dirty GNU Hippies. A recent article put "first post" at about 80 percent of the troll market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 "first post" trolls. This is consistent with the number of first posts.

All major surveys show that Putrid smelling greasy GNU hippies have steadily declined in market share. Slashdot is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Grubby Smelly Linux Hippies are to survive at all it will be among troll hobbyist dabblers. Slashdot continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Dirty GNU Hippies are dead.

Then why did you post it, Hemos? (0, Flamebait)

billybob (18401) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036141)

it's the sponsored links on the right side of the page - where the ads have always been.

Hmm, really? Tell me again why this is news worthy? If the morons who submited it are too stupid to figure this out themselves, that's their problem. Seriously, save everyone time. Dont post shit like this.

Re:Then why did you post it, Hemos? (-1)

Frank White (515786) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036284)

Because it was an excuse to use the sentence "A number of written that the sky is fallen because Google is allowing sponsored rankings."

Its dual grammatical mistakes are a credit to this fine journalistic outlet.

Re:Then why did you post it, Hemos? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036350)

Regardless, Google is willing to sacrifice screenspace for sponsorship...it's a recipe we're all painfully familiar with.

There are very good reasons for considering this as the first step to the end of another good thing.

google widener! (-1)

Klerck (213193) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036146)

.I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .enough .charaters .per .line .that .really .sucks .when .that .happens .and .you .have .to .put .some .lame .lameness .filter .defeater .text .in .there .i .wonder .how .many .people .will .read .this .whole .comment .I .certainly .hope .it .doesnt .annoy .too .many .people .This .is .just .the .beginning .because .PAGE .WIDENING .IS .BACK .I .like .wide .pages .I .wish .all .pages .could .be .as .wide .as .this .dont .you .wide .pages .are .much .cooler .than .those .narrow .pages .you .are .used .to .reading .because .you .dont .have .to .worry .about .the .lameness .filter .telling .you .that .you .don't .have .e

*yawn* (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036147)

Boy, people are really stupid.

I mean... what do these idiots want -- everyone to be listed randomly in the advertising section of each page, regardless of how much they paid? That just ain't the way advertising works.

I actually find the advertising useful on google.com. Hell, when I was searching for flower delivery companies online with google during vday week, I wasn't sure who to go with -- but the advertising results gave me several great options and I wound up using two of them.

Re:*yawn* (1)

binarybum (468664) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036160)

well if you actually use these ads you should support outcomes based on relevance values, not user-irrelevant data such as contribution amount.

Where are these ads? (0)

loucura! (247834) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036148)

I use Google extensively and have never seen these ads that 'have always' been there? So where are they?

Re:Where are these ads? (1)

Drinahn (555664) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036166)

Right hand side of the search results page. Little pink shaded area. :-)

Re:Where are these ads? (1)

UTPinky (472296) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036180)

Do a search like flowers or cars, you'll see em at the top and right side of the screen

Re:Where are these ads? (2, Informative)

skt (248449) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036194)

I think that they are referring to the sponsored link boxes. It depends on what you search for, but here [google.com] is an example.. The only change that I can see is that they moved the advertising box from the side of the screen towards the top. It's a bit more intrusive now, but still much better than blinking banner ads.

Re:Where are these ads? (1)

saberworks (267163) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036262)

No no, those at the top have been there a long time (depending on what you search for). The boxes in question (at least, the ones referenced as the "right side" are pictured here:

http://www.google.com/ads/images/ads-homepage.gi f

Looks like that option is down, because a week ago I searched for "snowboard" and got 5 boxes down the right hand side, now I can't get any to show up... strange.

Re:Where are these ads? (1)

leviramsey (248057) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036267)

I think that they are referring to the sponsored link boxes. It depends on what you search for, but here [google.com] is an example.. The only change that I can see is that they moved the advertising box from the side of the screen towards the top. It's a bit more intrusive now, but still much better than blinking banner ads.

Google has had the ads atop the results (as well as off to the side) since they debuted the system. They do charge more, but they're still on a fixed cost.

Re:Where are these ads? (0)

cyril3 (522783) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036331)

You only get them if you search for stuff that someone can sell.. If your search is for info on a topic its likely that noone has it sponsored.

So if you search flowers - ads. If you search International Criminal Court - no ads.

Re:Where are these ads? (1)

edashofy (265252) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036256)

Duh, just search for them [google.com] :)

This is the way it should have been. (5, Insightful)

lw54 (73409) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036150)

Under a new feature scheduled to launch Tuesday night, the rankings of a search engine devoted to advertisers will be determined in part by how much Web sites offer to be listed in specific categories.

Before, all advertisers paid a set fee and were randomly displayed in random order. Now there highest paying customers are shown first.

While I wish they didn't do this, as it affects our advertising budget, I think this is logical and I support their decision to make money. After all, if google doesn't make money, they'll go under and we'll all lose access to the best search engine.

Re:This is the way it should have been. (5, Interesting)

bentini (161979) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036244)

Actually, it's even better than you describe it. The highest paying customers are probably shown first. However, they also factor in how good the pages are (as judged by how many people click-through the links), so the most popular pages are shown first, even over money. Therefore, if I search for a product name: say, purify (a program to check C code dynamically), and there are 10 people who have paid more than that company to sell products branded purify that are not at all what I or anyone else want (spam spam spam spam), it still won't show up.
They've instituted a safeguard so not only is spamming not useful, it's barely an option. The items that people are most often interested in are the ones that you'll see most prominently.
Go Google!

Re:This is the way it should have been. (2)

pangloss (25315) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036249)

I don't believe it's been random (as you described) for awhile, if ever. Well, the initial placement (say if 25 widget manufacturers advertisers simultaneously place ads to fall under searches for widgets), is an equal rotation, but for awhile now, the practice has been to place ads with higher "click-thru" rates over time higher.

So if the Widgets R Us' ad is getting the most click-thrus by users looking for widgets, then their ad would start appearing at the top of the list.

It's a sort of ad-relevance ranking that fit pretty well with the general google page-rank method I think.

I'm not opposed to google allowing ppl to pay more for better ad placement in that right column--i don't feel like it interferes, misleads, blah blah blah etc. with the quality of my searches. the right column of ads is clearly distinct from the search results. it's not like they're allowing ads to masquerade as search results.

Re:This is the way it should have been. (4, Informative)

pangloss (25315) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036264)

ah such bad form, replying to my own post, but here:

i just found this google faq [google.com] about ad positioning, too.

Re:This is the way it should have been. (0, Troll)

SilLumTao (134743) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036332)

After all, if google doesn't make money, they'll go under and we'll all lose access to the best search engine.

My concern is that google won't be as useful as a search engine now that the highest bidder can get their sites listed first. Hopefully, I won't waste more time searching for what I really wanted... It is a shame though, but this appears to be the post dotcom reality.

Ironically, I switched to google because the old search engines were being polluted and diluted by ad money.

BFD (0, Troll)

BigumD (219816) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036153)

Great, so some company is going to spend $10,000 more to be the first ad ignored on the right side of the screeen. Bravo to Google for being able to sell that real estate. At least it's not as intrusive as an OSDN bar on the top of some other site.

Re:BFD (1)

Q-bert][ (21619) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036178)

Oh yea, because it's just THAT hard to hit the lil down arrow?

Re:BFD (1)

skt (248449) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036204)

it's not on the right side of the screen anymore, it's towards the top. Try searching for something that people buy, like cars..

Just keep outbidding Microsoft for the top spot (0, Offtopic)

TenPin22 (213106) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036154)

They will always bid higher than you !

Sounds like fun if you can come up with a valid reason to bid.

Waste of Space (2, Redundant)

Drinahn (555664) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036158)

This would only be worthy of comment if it were actually worrying. ie if a given company's pages were ranked higher due to payments to google rather than doc relevance.


Given that it isn't the case, this isn't worthy of comment.


Hold on! I've commented! Damn!

Product Link (3, Informative)

piersevent (201870) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036163)

For crying out loud people, here's the link [google.com]

Link to another search engine for the story? (5, Insightful)

EricKrout.com (559698) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036167)

I don't see why you linked to another search engine for the story.

You could have simply gotten the information from the horse's mouth [google.com] .

Linking to an article that tries to stir controversy and sway readers away from Google is highly sketchy. Google has nothing to hide by this, and even the Slashdot editor who posted this story admitted that it's nothing more than they've already BEEN doing.

They sell ads that show up on the side. We'll always know which results are real and which aren't. The real ones show up in the middle; the results that are paid-for advertisements show up on the right in colored boxes and are clearly marked as advertisements.

Most of the time these "advertisements" are more often useful things than typical gimmicks that you find with image banner ads (i.e. click the monkey - win cash!, if this is flashing you won $100,000, etc etc etc).

It's fine when you dump on Microsoft because they're evil ;-)

But don't sling mud at Google. They're just trying to stay profitable so we can continue to use their great service.

EricKrout.com :: 9 Out Of 10 People Use Me [erickrout.com]

FUCK YOUR STUPID SPAM .SIG (-1)

L.Torvalds (548450) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036176)

At least link to Goatse.cx or some bukake if you are going to bother linking. Your faggot-assed attempt at spamming here is fucking gay.

Re:Link to another search engine for the story? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036217)

Because this has been the idiot policy of /.
Every other day there is a Reuters story with
a link to yahoo that caries a regurgitated
version of the original. Maybe /.
haven't figured out that Reuters is an English
Language service. So why link to another engine
for this story? Journalistic Freedom - just
kidding.

Re:Link to another search engine for the story? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036286)

Amen, dude at least they don't interweave the damn ads with the real results like yahoo and the other places. that's a reason i went to Google in the 1st place anyway

Not really... (3, Interesting)

AllMightyPaul (553038) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036169)

The ads that people complain about so much aren't really that obtrusive. They are highlited to stand out (and make it easier to avoid them) and say "Sponsored Link" next to them. You have to be pretty daft to think that a sponsored link was an actual search result.

Hopefully this new advertising system won't make it harder to distinquish between real results and advertiser's links. Just as long as I can get the relevant results I'm used to, I don't think I care.

Search Directory (-1, Flamebait)

Renraku (518261) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036170)

Google is probably going to end up being a 'yellow pages' type search directory instead of a full-fledged search engine.

Re:Search Directory (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036207)

Your ideas intrigue me... and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Search Directory (1)

grahams (5366) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036212)

They have had a directory [google.com] for some time now.... This is no news either. :)

Re:Search Directory (2)

bentini (161979) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036221)

Yeah. That's worked out so well for Altavista.

Altavista started as a research project, much like Google. When it first came out, it was undeniably the best search engine on the web, much like google. Not only did it become useful, it was based on awesome technology (alphas and 64-bit hardware, hell yeah!), much like google( they use clustering).
However, Altavista was made at Digital, which can't market. Google has a profitable business set up around remaining lean and employing some of the most brilliant people in computer science.
Does that sound like the type of organization that would turn to being a yellow pages?
BTW, Google does use the open directory AS a phonebook/yahoo style directory. They're SUPPORTING Open Source without having the ability to close that later. Don'tyou think they'd be starting their own directory now if they wanted to do that later?
Trust me, Google is by nerds, for nerds. And since it's privately owned (and making money), it's going to stay that way.

Re:Search Directory (1)

josh crawley (537561) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036354)

Heh, I know that Google is made by comp. sci. nerds :-) They are also somewhat bored, as they made this portal search too: http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=xx-hacker

Hope you can read l33t sp33k. :)

Re:Search Directory (1)

checkitout (546879) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036223)

Google is probably going to end up being a 'yellow pages' type search directory instead of a full-fledged search engine.

Funny you say that, since that's the exact search engine model they're replacing. For example, yahoo's search engine is now powered by google...

There's nothing wrong with making a buck. They're still being awfully nice about it. Infact quite often, those ads are actually worth clicking on because of how targetted they are.

Re:Search Directory (1)

Nessak (9218) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036246)

Why in the world would you say this? They might have a directory feature, but there has been no indication that they are moving away from general searches. After that, that is what they are known and loved for. They are slightly changing the way they charge and sort ads, nothing more.

If there is one thing I belive good has, it's integerity. They haven't change a bit (for the worst) since they started and the more I read about them the less it seems like they will change for the worst. They are a company and know how to make money -- change for technology and clearly labled paid search results that no one could confuse with normal search results. They make money, we get a great search engine. Now, why would they change to being a primarly a searchable directory?

Re:Search Directory (2)

tempest303 (259600) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036269)

I'm not sure how you got modded up, but did you RTFA? This doesn't affect the REAL content on the site, it only affects the order of placement for the ads that are already there. They're not going to change to mixing-content-with-ads like almost all the other search engines.

But, since Hemos' comments went unnoticed, allow me to quote the article:

The system lets Web sites raise their bids to increase their chances for higher placement on the section of Google's site that's devoted to sponsored links.
[emphasis mine]

Is that clear enough, or do we have to break it down into exclusively monosyllabic words for you?

Re:Search Directory (1)

Jack_of_Hearts (135367) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036296)

"Is that clear enough, or do we have to break it down into exclusively monosyllabic words for you?"

Hehe, asking him that question is sort of like handing out reading instruction manuals to the illiterate.

Lousy Journalism (2, Insightful)

ByTor-2112 (313205) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036171)

The last sentence of the article sums it all up, and is typical crappy journalism:

The company has been listing results from advertisers under a similar format since 2000, but it previously sold space under a fixed pricing system, which prevented sites from boosting their rankings with more money.


Sounds to me like excite is just jealous because their business model failed.

Re:Lousy Journalism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036294)

That could be a valid comment except this story is from the AP (Associated Press) Wire. In other words, it's not affiliated with Excite! at all.

Here is the Yahoo! link:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/ 20020220/ap_on_hi_te/google_ads_1

And the AP wire itself:
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/main.html?SLUG=GOOGLE-AD S

KLERCK NEEDS TO DIE (-1)

The BOFH Troll (549884) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036175)

Klerck, you're the worst troll ever and I DEMAND you stop posting on Slashdot because we don't need you.

I AGREE WITH PARENT!!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036304)

Me and other joe average slashdot reader likes to read trolls.... page widening just stop me from doing so. PLEASE klerck, CUT THE SHIT OUT!!!

The Sky Has Not Fallen (5, Insightful)

MathJMendl (144298) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036184)

At first, this article concerns me. "Search engines" like Overture that charge for listings seriously affect the quality of the services, as well as their integrity. Google, though, has clearly distinguished advertisements as what they are, labeling them as such and using different backround colors from them. For this reason, I respect Google, and have continued to use it (as well as for the fact that it is the best search engine and is closely integrated with the ODP, which I sometimes edit for).

The few key points that prevent me from worrying me about this are these:
Google also intends to maintain strong firewalls between the business and search sides of its operations.


"We take our editorial integrity very seriously, just like a newspaper does," Kordestani said.

Google will display up to eight advertisers on the far right-hand side of its Web page under a shaded section labeled "sponsored links."
They will continue to distinguish between search engine results and advertisements and keep the ads separate from the results, to the right side of the screen. For this reason, that article and the title of this on SlashDot seem to be alarmist and misleading. Google is maintaining its integrity, at least for now.

One might also note that Excite, which published this article, uses Overture for its results, and labels them "Search Results for: [term]." Might they have a bias?

Re:The Sky Has Not Fallen (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036316)

One might also note that Excite, which published this article, uses Overture for its results, and labels them "Search Results for: [term]." Might they have a bias?

This story has nothing to do with Excite!! It's from the AP (Associated Press) Wire. Jeez guys, quit looking for conspiracies ... Excite! just happened to publish it because they subscribe to the AP service.

Here is a link to the most updated AP article on the subject:
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/main.html?SLUG=GOOGLE-AD S

Give it a break!

Re:The Sky Has Not Fallen (2)

MathJMendl (144298) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036321)

This story has nothing to do with Excite!!
Yes, I saw that it was AP after I posted that, but it was too late to do anything. I still stand behind the rest of my post though.

Re:The Sky Has Not Fallen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036334)

At first, this article concerns me. "Search engines" like Overture that charge for listings seriously affect the quality of the services, as well as their integrity.

I hope google is paid per-click for the ad placements since it makes rapeping bulk email sites [overture.com] easier and the money goes to a better place.

huh? (3, Insightful)

7-Vodka (195504) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036186)

Okay, so google still looks the same, still works the same and hasn't become clogged with ads. What's wrong here? Why is this a /. story?

I guess Hemos just wanted to use the dollar icon on the front page. *shrugs*. Nothing to see here, please move along.

The change is...? (2)

mikeage (119105) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036191)

I'm a little confused... how does this differ from what they currently do with the "featured (or is it sponsered, I forget) link"?

The real news (-1, Offtopic)

donglekey (124433) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036195)

.I .think .that .The .real .story .here .is .that .someone .read .the .article .and .posted .and .informed .link .themselves .Holy .mighty .Jesus .ass .tities .christo .I .think .the .sky .is .falling .Xdefaults .Xmodmap .Xresources .addressbook .addressbook.lu .bash_history .bashrc .dayplan .dayplan.priv .dvipsrc .emacs .exrc .gimprc .grok .holiday .hotjava .jazz .kde .kermrc .lyxrc .muttrc .nc_keys .pgp .pinerc .profile .seyon .signature .ssh .stonxrc .susephone .tex .uitrc.console .uitrc.vt100 .uitrc.vt102 .uitrc.xterm .urlview .vimrc .xcoralrc .xfm .xim .xinitrc .xserverrc.secure .xsession .xtalkrc.Xdefaults .Xmodmap .Xresources .addressbook .addressbook.lu .bash_history .bashrc .dayplan .dayplan.priv .dvipsrc .emacs .exrc .gimprc .grok .holiday .hotjava .jazz .kde .kermrc .lyxrc .muttrc .nc_keys .pgp .pinerc .profile .seyon .signature .ssh .stonxrc .susephone .tex .uitrc.console .uitrc.vt100

MOD THIS PAGE WIDENER down, troll (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036206)

damn trolls messing up the reading, go back and post at -1 u moron, not 2, u damn troll

Okay and...? (1)

diggem (74763) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036197)

What's the big deal? Same thing, but now Google can ask somebody to pay more money for the same add because they want it to be.. "more" relevant than the other adds.

At least it isn't like.. *ahem* some other search engines who provide links for paying customers first, then the rest of the "riff-raff". Frankly I thought the add links were already quite relevant. Of course, I don't even click on these adds, but I appreciate that they keep out of my way when I'm searching for something! I'll keep on appreciating it as long as Google realizes that they have something truely golden in their search engine itself and don't sell out like the other guys.

The Google Appliance [google.com] is an example of a great idea, and a good way to keep the money rolling in. :) Considering the price [slashdot.org] .. :P While not completely selling out to the pop-under and flash adds that everyone else is peddling.

AHAHAHA! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036203)

Eat my ass [goatse.cx]

Selling rankings is deviously clever (3, Insightful)

The Famous Brett Wat (12688) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036205)

I haven't read the article, but I intend to comment on something a little more general than just Google, so bear with me. Actually, the first time this practice really struck me was on eBay, but I've since realised it's way older than that.

The practice that I'm talking about here is that of selling relative rankings in an advertising medium. The beauty of the system is that the value of advertising really does "float free" in the marketplace, but at the same time empowers the seller of the ad space to keep prices up without looking greedy.

In the case of eBay, they keep adding new "features" you can use to increase the relative profile of your auction. Each of these features costs money, of course (other than a couple of basic ones which are included in the cost of a basic auction). Rather than ratchet up the prices on these features, eBay seems to prefer to add new, fancier features which cost more money. But note: these new features have the side effect of making the older features less valuable because they aren't the biggest eye-catchers on the block anymore. This means that the cost of the highest-profile feature keeps going up, even if all the prices of existing features are static.

In searching for precedents to this, I remembered the plain old printed White Pages (TM in various locations, no doubt) telephone directory. This doesn't accept ads, but over time they've gone from "every listing looks the same", to "pay extra for a bold entry", to "pay even more for a SUPERBOLD entry", and so on.

Re:Selling rankings is deviously clever (2, Funny)

ender81b (520454) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036247)

I haven't read the article


Hell man, It's slashdot. Reading the article is hardly the point! Geesh, you new here?

=)

How dare they!? (3, Funny)

Sean Clifford (322444) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036219)

How dare they put unobtrusive advertising on their search engine? I want more annoying pop-up ads, transitional advertising pages, flash animations, and javascript so my mp3's skip. Even better if the ad covers the content, so I have to move it so I can get two paragraph of links to 404 errors.

God damn them, damn them all to the fiery pits of hell!

pr0n (0)

raelitycheckbounced (558540) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036222)

great, now no matter what you type in the search engine, you're guarenteed to get 100 porn sites that have payed google at the top of the list

Let the market take care of this... (5, Interesting)

El Camino SS (264212) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036228)


Its all about cost/benefit analysis...

The last time I checked, google is allowed to make a profit. Google is also allowed to fail miserably if the customers don't like it.

Goes right back to the free market world, and costs.
So if "the cost" of trying to find something on the net gets too high on google, then google will be forced to find another source of revenue when their customers leave.

Simple as that. The market is a harsh place. If we love our google, we have to pay for it. Otherwise, no money means no google. So you have to scroll down the page. Well, that is a cost of freeloading. Ask the people who used to pay for Lexis/Nexis (sp?) what solid, usable information costs.

Even abcnews.go.com has banners before you get to the news. It is coming. Really, it is a minor annoyance, and not much more IMHO. I certainly won't stop using google. I hope the make all the money in the world, they serve a real purpose on the net.

Support to google (1)

ajaygautam (554694) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036230)

I repeat what a lot of guys have said: I don't mind these ads, as it keeps google in business.

Sometime, I click on these ads to help keep money come to google.

I request all those who want to keep using google to do the same.

A .com that I used to work for closed last year. I know the pain.

Microsoft Allows Smart Tags... In Newest Browser (2)

wadetemp (217315) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036231)

A number of written that the sky is fallen because Microsft is allowing smart tags. Of course, if you read the article smart tags are only implemented in the latest version of thier browser - where new features that some people like and others don't have always been.

Quick, post something nice about AOL now!

Non-issue (2, Insightful)

saberworks (267163) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036235)

This is such a non-issue. They're not intermingling these sponsored links among your search results - rather, they're completely separate from the content (as they've always been). This doesn't affect users of the service, it affects advertisers (who may have to pay more to be listed at the top of the RIGHT HAND COLUMN). Big deal.

Google adds are helpful! (0, Troll)

debiandude (515835) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036239)

Say what you want to say about other search engines trying to decieve you about the adds, but leave Google alone. A large number of times, especially when I am searching for a product, those adds are exactly where I want to go to. And besides when I am not looking for a product the adds are desguised as search choices so its really the best of both worlds.

Stephen King, author, dead at 54 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036240)


I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Thank god (1)

Billobob (532161) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036245)

Google plans to turn away companies trying to buy a listing under categories unrelated to their main business. For instance, Google already has refused advertising from credit card companies that tried to buy listings under the "Palm Pilot" category, said Omid Kordestani, the company's senior vice president of worldwide sales and business development. Even if it already has been active for sometime, and only on the right side of the page, at least we won't have to stare at "MAKE MONEY NOW!!!!!" ads across the side of the page every time we search for the happy fun ball.

Timeline (2, Interesting)

rajeevishere (416066) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036250)

1. Google_in_the_old_days didnt differentiate between results using who pays more principle.
2. Then they introduced sponsored links, NOT results.
3. Now for the first time, they actualy *rank* , the sponsored links based on who_pays-more.

I am not a star gazer, but it is hard to miss the current over here. Google sucessfully cashed in on the Page Citation Model [stanford.edu] , now for the Pre-IPO Google Inc. bsuiness sounds more interesting.
But lots of new cool stuff keep appearing on those pristine pages..i would surely like to see that continue. And..boy! do these things really mess up their interface.

Damn it. (4, Insightful)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036259)

Though I've absolutely no intention of doing a thing about it, I'm going to sit here and complain and bitch because someone who is providing a free service to my lazy ass has the *balls* to try and make money off of it!!!

I thought slashdot collectively stopped caring about this kind of non-issue pap back in 1998.

- A.P.

Re:Damn it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036367)

... I'm going to sit here and complain and bitch because someone who is providing a free service to my lazy ass has the *balls* to try and make money off of it!!!

Let's not forget that Google makes a shitload of money already providing the back end to Yahoo! and other services to businesses. How much is enough? It's not about making money. It's about making MORE MONEY.

Any business must turn a profit, but there are these management ideologies which say a profit must be turned in every aspect of a business. In fact, if it won't make a profit, the business should dump the free search service, this implies. I personally reject the idea that a corporation can not provide a service above and beyond its moneymaking capabilities, AND I personally feel that a free, pure, public search service does a lot to promote Google's services. I also basically feel that any kind of SOLD result that comes back from a search should be laabeled in large letters as "SOLD ADS NOT SEARCH RESULTS", otherwise it is patently deceptive. What this story means to me is that the corporate goons got a hold of Google. The free search engine is going to be profitable Dammit! no matter what the cost.

hardly obtrusive (3, Informative)

spir0 (319821) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036263)

I've never noticed the ads before. I had to go back and look for them after reading this.

I agree with others who say this isn't newsworthy, but to comment, the excite article does say explicitly that the sponsored links are "on the section of Google's site that's devoted to sponsored links" - ie... the side.. in really small writing.

why didn't anybody kick up a stink when yahoo started putting on pop-up windows? or when groups.yahoo started making you click thru an ad randomly when reading message?

google has to make money from somewhere.. may as well be little tiny ads that nobody notices.

The Big Deal (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036270)

Here's what the big deal actually is:

Slashdot has posted an article that appears to be well-researched and admits that there's no story here. This is a HUGE change from the normal slashdot fare of posting half-assed stories that spread FUD.

I'm scared.

Google (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036272)


you are a cunt. Thank you and goodnight.

English? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036273)

"A number of written that the sky is fallen because Google is allowing sponsored rankings."

Come on. Many thousands of people read this site. Is it really that difficult to phrase things in proper english?

"A number of [people have] written that the sky is fall[ing]/[has fallen] because Google is allowing sponsored rankings."

Was that so hard?

A very curious behaviour.... (3, Interesting)

cswiii (11061) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036299)

from the article:
Popular online search engine maker Google Inc. is introducing a new program that allows Web sites to be displayed more prominently by paying more money - an advertising-driven system derided by critics as an invitation to deceptive business practices.

Remember, the deceptive business practise could be on either side -- Google or the advertiser.

About a week ago, I was looking for a good deal on a pair of quality Vasque Sundowners [google.com] . In searching for that, two coloured ads appeared above my search results, each offering the "best selection" in Vasque footwear.

The only thing is, one of them had no Vasque anything in stock.

Strangely enough, I just did the same search to try and prove my point, but only the REI ad appears anymore; The two-bit footwear company no longer has an ad up there. Now, this might well mean that their ad rotation is over, but I found it interesting nonetheless.

On that note, how hard would it be to make a search engine smart (ethical?) enough to search a website to assure that the keywords people bought have something to do with the products on their site? Or is that just counterproductive to a coherent business model?

Don't Bitch. Click through. (3, Interesting)

SamIIs (65268) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036310)

We all really really like this company. Google has a LOT of fans on Slashdot. Why is that none of you think that actively supporting a company you like is a Good Idea?

I make an effort to click on an ad when it follows from my search anyway. If I'm looking for Linksys's support page, and it turns out that LinkSys has paid for an ad at the side, I'll click through. It's not so hard.

I want Google to survive, so I'll glance at their ads, and I'll use them when I can.

Just a thought (2)

jsse (254124) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036311)

I'd be grateful if they'd let us choose to prevent our query-result from taking paid-ranking into consideration. Sometime we use google for academic and scientific queries, and ranking commercial sites higher in this case will greatly affect the accuracy.

Say letting us to specify the catagories while searching e.g "aspect catagory:academic" to prevent unwanted commercial info.

It actually help google's client accurately focusing on right market segment, thus make their money-spent worthy.

Your view in this is greatly appreciated.

Re:Just a thought (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036358)

My view is that you should read the article more carefully. The "paid ranking" is only for ads, which are separate from search results, and are clearly marked as "sponsored links". If you're doing academic research, simply ignore anything that doesn't have a white background.

Re:Just a thought (2)

90XDoubleSide (522791) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036360)

I'd be grateful if they'd let us choose to prevent our query-result from taking paid-ranking into consideration.

Google isn't using paid ranking, they're ordering the text ads according to who paid more for them.

Overture? (5, Interesting)

modulus (67148) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036314)

What's interesting about this post not what the article claims to be about. The article, running on an Excite web site, is fairly clearly written deceptively to make Google look bad. It throws in what amounts to an ad for these ridiculous Overture people.

A quick google search on "Excite Overture" leads to an article about how Overture is the company that runs paid ads on the Excite search engine.

So this story is not about how some people are stupid and think google is shady, but about how some people at Excite apparently are both stupid and shady.

The Sky HAS fallen... (1)

aengblom (123492) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036322)

A number of written that the sky is fallen because Google is allowing sponsored rankings. Of course, if you read the article it's the sponsored links on the right side of the page - where the ads have always been.

See this is the problem with assuming causal/effect realationships. The writers correctly determined that the sky was falling but failed to realize the actual cause was that Slashdot editors actually READ the story and CORRECTED peoples inflamatory assumptions.

The history of ad selling in search engines (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036323)

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

+MONDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: I will not suck any more dick ever again.
+MONDAY EVENING+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

+TUESDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: I will not suck any more dick ever again.
+TUESDAY EVENING+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

+WEDNESDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: I will not suck any more dick ever again.
+WEDNESDAY EVENING+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

+THURSDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: I will not suck any more dick ever again.
+THURSDAY EVENING+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

+FRIDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: I will not suck any more dick ever again.
+FRIDAY EVENING+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

+SATURDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: I will not suck any more dick ever again.
+SATURDAY EVENING+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

+SUNDAY MORNING+
Cmdr Taco: Today is the Lord's day.
+SUNDAY AFTERNOON+
Cmdr Taco: *slurp* *slurp* *slurp*

Bush makes it official... (1, Funny)

hyoo (155460) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036333)

... Google has joined the "Axis of Evil."

And for "the sky is falling" crowd (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036343)

How the hell is google supposed to make money you communist bitches?

You leftist college kids need to move to Western Europe where they still think socialism/communism is a good idea.

Re:And for "the sky is falling" crowd (-1)

dadaist (544022) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036382)

Arise ye workers from your slumbers
Arise ye prisoners of want
For reason in revolt now thunders
And at last ends the age of cant.
Away with all your superstitions
Servile masses arise, arise
We'll change henceforth the old tradition
And spurn the dust to win the prize.

So comrades, come rally

And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.
So comrades, come rally
And the last fight let us face
The Internationale unites the human race.

No more deluded by reaction
On tyrants only we'll make war
The soldiers too will take strike action
They'll break ranks and fight no more
And if those cannibals keep trying
To sacrifice us to their pride
They soon shall hear the bullets flying
We'll shoot the generals on our own side.


No saviour from on high delivers
No faith have we in prince or peer
Our own right hand the chains must shiver
Chains of hatred, greed and fear
E'er the thieves will out with their booty
And give to all a happier lot.
Each at the forge must do their duty
And we'll strike while the iron is hot.

Money rules all (2)

jsse (254124) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036362)

It's hard to blame google, the world out there is like that...

- Radio stations play more songs from those companies do most advertising

- Supermarkets charges suppliers 'placement-fee' if they'd like to have their goods placed at better position on shelves.

- Publishers pay to get good books reviews.(*cough* Amazon*cough*)

- Oil companies pay to get politicans work for them.

Can't blame them (2, Interesting)

UnrefinedLayman (185512) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036365)

I sure as hell can't figure out how they've survived this long with their "Make No Money/Spend Lots of Money" business strategy.

I mean really, how much money do you think Google pulls in through their ads? Do you think that cost per month can even pay for their electricity costs for powering and cooling 8,000 machines? How in the world do they do it?

It's NOT the ads on the right (2, Insightful)

mr.crutch (98516) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036373)

Hey Hemos, why don't you do a little research before spouting off in support of your favorite Linux-based search engine?

The ads appear at the top of the search results. Observe this search [google.com] for computer software. Of course they are quite plainly marked and it's not a big deal.

I just find it interesting that slowly, but surely, Google is doing away with the things that made it unique in the field (at least from a commercialism standpoint).

Oh well...

Alan Thicke. DEAD. (-1)

Alan_Thicke (553655) | more than 12 years ago | (#3036379)

I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found dead in his home this morning. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon.
He will be missed :(



Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):

Show me that smile again.
Ooh show me that smile.
Don't waste another minute on your crying.
We're nowhere near the end.
We're nowhere near.
The best is ready to begin.

As long as we got each other [slashdot.org]
We got the world
Sitting right in our hands.
Baby rain or shine;
All the time.
We got each other
Sharing the laughter and love.

Google slashdotted (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3036380)

Here's the cached version [google.com]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>