didn't network solutions learn the first time around..oh wait..
not sure if i should be reporting this or buying these domains in bulk..i mistype the o in .com all the time..too bad the registration process involves mailing/faxing in your order..google.cm is available
While the [miserable failure] Google bomb has existed for sometime with the accompanying Google explanation. In all honesty how many people were really searching for that term anyway. Now searching Senator [Rick Santorum] (NSFW) brings up a less than desirable result in the number two slot. Seems the senator made an unflattering remark about gay sex to start off the anti-santorum campaign. We've also got an urban dictionary and Wikipedia entry to round things out.
So I'm working on trying to get a better handle on the new Adwords Quality changes and came across something very interesting this morning. I bought a new domain yesterday afternoon and last night created a landing page on it. I looked in the log file this morning and there were only 24 lines. Of those 18 were from my IP. The other 6 lines were from Google IP's, Now I'm aware that at some point all of the ads pass in front of human so one is a person the other is the adwords bot. According to Google the adwords bot uses [AdsBot-Google] as a user agent (see Adwords Support). Let me stress again this is a brand new domain with no external pre-existing links. The real clincher is the time of the first visit with the GoogleBot UA match almost exactly to when I submitted a new ad to adwords. You can see the sanitized logfile here.
In what's going to be a classic "bad data push" if I ever saw one, searching for [therapy products] on Google right now, they ask if you want to see the results for Yahoo (screen shot). Really makes you wonder what the heck is going on over at the plex lately doesn't it?
Following their now traditional route of pushing UI tweaks out there, and seeing if anyone notices it, Google seem to be adding yet another way to push organic results down the SERPs, and maybe sell some stuff, without seeming evil.
I got a nice e-mail from Omar at BetUS.com, and I have to give them kudos on a nice campaign:
They've got odds running on who will be the top technorati blog on January 1st. Just as a disclosure, I'm not affiliated with these folks in anyway, I just thought it was a pretty cool link baiting idea.
That's a quote from hackmatt.blogspot.com. Some socially challenge cracker guessed Matt mullenweg's self-admittedly-lame password and go excited enough to play with himself. When that wasn't satisfying, he made a blog post about it:
Don't forget to wipe your hard drive before you sell somebody an 'in perfect working condition' but actually defunct laptop. Or at least wipe the gay porn, the voyeur photos you've been taking of women on the train, and your various C.V.'s with conflicting information.
The newest version of Firefox intends to have a Google spying mechanism built into the browser.
Anti-phishing capability, which Mozilla has branded "Safe Browsing," is one of the marquee features in Firefox 2.0 and one of the reasons a third alpha is necessary. Now baked into Firefox 2.0 alpha 3, Google Safe Browsing is triple-licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPL) 1.1, the GPL 2.0 (define) and the LGLP (define).
Safe Browsing inspects a visited site against a regularly updated list of known phishing sites. The list of phishing sites may be downloaded automatically within the browser or can optionally be checked against Google's online list of known miscreants.
A while ago I noticed the new IE beta labeled one of my sites as a risky potential phishing site (although it had nothing but a general search box on it). Does Google consider you a miscreant? What happens if they do? Imagine if these companies ever compete in your market and accidentally destroy your brand. How much can we trust the new gatekeepers?