| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
"Open core" overloaded"Open core" overloadedPosted Jul 31, 2010 20:56 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: "Open core" overloaded by hingo Parent article: Neary: Rotten to the (Open) Core?
That might not have been personalization. You could just have had a different set of machines win the race to provide you with answers. Google is a massively distributed system: in such systems, cross-node consistency is the first thing to go.
(Log in to post comments)
"Open core" overloaded Posted Aug 1, 2010 11:32 UTC (Sun) by hingo (guest, #14792) [Link] "There is no standard google any more." 57 personalization signals. Ditto FB. @elipariser of moveon talks about "filter bubbles" at #pdf10twitter.com/timoreilly Since "job" is clearly active in open hardware, and I've been active in the open source related debate, I would still guess on personalization as that makes more sense than assuming that we got well personalized results just due to chance.
"Open core" overloaded Posted Aug 8, 2010 13:13 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
But you *do* get different results in consecutive search queries due to chance. Several systems with slightly different datasets race to give you results, and whichever happens to get there first is the one you see the results from (very roughly).
Don't assume that all variability is due to some sort of evil personalization. Some of it is an efficiency hack.
"Open core" overloaded Posted Aug 11, 2010 7:31 UTC (Wed) by job (subscriber, #670) [Link]
Interesting. I never knew your Google results were so very much personalized. That will give the SEOs something to loose sleep over.
|
|
||||||||||||