MESSAGE
| DATE | 2003-11-17 |
| FROM | David Sugar
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] A much more complete analysis of the msn search eng ine...
|
That is no big secret! And what a scary thought a Microsoft manufactured
machine is; very deliberately crippled hardware. But there is an
example/prototype of this already, it's called the ?XBox(sp)?, which I
consider a deliberate and very fundamental assault on what Richard likes to
refer to as "freedom 0", or the right of users to execute code.
I was equally appalled (but unsurprised, as I long ago both expected and
predicted this...) by an article that Microsoft is now claiming and asserting
"patent rights" in their new XML schemas, thereby subverting the very
definition of and their claim of using open and interchangable XML data
formats.
On Monday 17 November 2003 10:40 am, Michael Richardson wrote:
> David, David, David. Microsoft only wants there to only be Microsoft in
> the computer world (no other OS). Wait until they start manufacturing
> Computers (and not through affiliates or partners).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Sugar [mailto:dyfet-at-ostel.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 10:35 AM
> To: hangout-at-nylxs.com
> Subject: [hangout] A much more complete analysis of the msn search
> engine...
>
>
>
> This article appeared in groklaw this morning:
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031117081729166
>
> It provides a much more detailed and complete analysis of what is going on
> with the msn search engine, and perhaps how it might relate to Microsoft's
> interest in google. Yes, it seems there is a very visible and deliberate
> hand manipulating msn search results, although in a different way than was
> first reported.
>
> "A Search Engine Mystery Solved"
>
> Monday, November 17 2003 -at- 08:17 AM EST
>
> Slashdot has a followup on the story we first broke about peculiar results
> on
> MSN compared with Google. I read through all the comments carefully, and
> picking through the trolls and the shills, I found that some think the
> phenomenon may be the result of MSN having first paid-for listings,
> followed
>
> by all the rest, the real results. However, it turns out there are no real
> results. You can't escape paid results anywhere on MSN. Moreover, it isn't
> results by computer algorithm alone; human editors are involved in
> filtering
>
> the results you get. Here is what I found out and how.
>
> First, I noted that one person on Slashdot reported running a search for
> "George W. Bush" and got some odd results:
>
> "Try George W. Bush. I just did. It'll say something on the order of 301
> hits.
> Scroll through the pages to the last hit. Suddenly, the number jumps
> through
>
> the roof. I find it hard to believe that the first 300 hits are all
> sponsored
> links. I think something else is going on here: MSN has not only sponsored
> links, but some kind of edited directory scheme going here, and it doesn't
> care to let you know that the first number it quoted is of those links
> which
>
> are sponsored or added editorial, and the second number is a raw search
> result."
>
>
> I did the same search and I agreed it couldn't be all paid results, unless
> the
> White House pays MSN for putting an official bio of the First Lady high on
> MSN's list. I don't think they'd use our tax dollars to do that. But sure
> enough, when you scroll through the 305 results they first promised to show
> you, if you continue by clicking "Next" again, it jumps to 1,153,228
> results,
> with no explanation on how 305 just became a million plus.
>
>
> I next did a search on MSN for "search engines" (with and without the
> quotations) and search and invariably, MSN comes up first. I never found
> Google at all. I stopped looking for it after the 300th result for search
> engines and 200 for search. Google was simply not findable in any
> reasonable
>
> way on MSN. Maybe you can find it, but I tried twice and I couldn't.
>
>
> They listed things like "Internet Public Library" and "Recipes search
> engines"
> and "Nerdworld", "Looksmart", "LinkMe.com", "Napster", and "Korean Search
> Engines Dot Com", and even a dead link to an old 1996 CNET article called
> "Can You Trust Your Search Engine?" -- but no Google. What possible
> algorithm
> could make that happen, without human intervention? There has to be
> something
> wrong when you can't find Google in a search for "search engines". They
> want
>
> to buy it, but they don't want you to find it?
>
>
> I then went to Google, and I ran the same searches. You can find MSN on
> Google
> just fine, on page 2. It doesn't list itself first, either. They are number
> 4, with Yahoo and Alta Vista ahead of it when you do a search for "search."
> When you search for "search engines" you get helpful things like Search
> Engine Watch, number one on the list. By now, I'm thinking maybe MSN just
> isn't a good search engine if you are looking for actual information, as
> opposed to what MSN will let you find. Was it true, though, that after the
> first few hundred paid search results, you could reach the rest of the
> unskewed results?
>
>
> Rather than assume, why not ask Microsoft, I thought? Surely they know how
> they built their search engine, no?
>
>
> If you go here and then click on "About MSN Search results" on the top of
> the
> list, you get to their page describing the results you may get on an MSN
> search:
>
>
> "Depending on what you search for, the following categories of results may
> appear:
>
> "Popular Topics
> "Featured Sites
> "Sponsored Sites
> "Web Directory Sites
> "Web Pages
> "Broaden Your Search
>
> "If any of the above categories don't appear in your results, it simply
> means
> that no Web sites in that category were relevant to your search."
>
> Each item is clickable to more information explaining what it means.
> Microsoft
> has it set up so that you can't link there directly, natch, but if you
> follow
> the links, here is what you will find for these items:
>
>
> First, Popular Topics:
>
>
> "Popular Topics results help you refine your search by suggesting related
> topics. Clicking one will start a new search and display a new results
> page.
>
> The most relevant or popular topics will be displayed first.
>
> "Note
> "Popular Topics results appear at the top of the first search results
> page,
>
> but won't appear for all searches."
>
> Next, Featured Sites:
>
>
> "Featured Sites are links that MSN Search editors believe are likely to be
> particularly relevant and useful. These sites are chosen from ones
> published
>
> by MSN affiliates, partners, sponsors, and advertisers, as well as other
> sites proven to be especially popular among our users. Featured Sites that
> best match your search words are drawn from:
>
> "The top sites for news in entertainment, sports, business, and politics.
> "The most popular musical artist sites for biographies and song samples.
> "MSN Encarta for encyclopedia information.
> "MSN content.
> "MSN content partners.
> "MSN advertising partners. (Microsoft accepts payment for listings from
> these.) "
>
> Next, Sponsored Sites:
>
>
> "Sponsored Sites are paid links provided to MSN Search and other Web search
> engines by a third party. The third party ranks the sites based upon bids
> received from advertisers, as well as their relevance to search words and
> phrases.
>
> "To highlight their special nature, MSN Search labels sponsored sites as
> such.
>
> "Sponsored Sites that best match your search words appear:
> "Only when you perform a basic search.
> "On the first page of results.
> "On subsequent result pages if additional Sponsored Sites are available.
> "When your search words are terms that Web sites have bid on."
>
> Next, Web Directory Results:
>
>
> "Web Directory results contain Web sites within the MSN Web Directory that
> best match your search words.
>
> "Note
> "Within Web Directory results, there may also be links where the Web site
> owners have paid for the expedited review of their site or for clicks to
> their site. These sites are ranked using the normal algorithm applied to
> all
>
> links within each section, with no change in rank due to payment."
>
> Next, Web Pages:
>
>
> "Web Page results include all other Internet-wide Web sites that best match
> your search words.
>
> "Note
> "Within Web Page results, there may be links where the Web site owners
> have
>
> paid for either expedited review of their site or paid for clicks to their
> site. These sites are ranked using the normal algorithm applied to all
> links
>
> within each section, with no change in rank due to payment."
>
> So it seems there is no way to escape paid-for results on MSN, no matter
> how
>
> hard you try. That isn't the most alarming part. The scariest on the entire
> list to me is the Featured Sites explanation, about the "links that MSN
> Search editors believe are likely to be particularly relevant and useful".
> There's the human intervention. Now you're talking scarey. This is, after
> all, Microsoft.
>
>
> Useful to whom? To Microsoft or to me? If I run a search for "search" I
> probably do want to know about Google.
>
>
> If I am looking for info on GNU/Linux, I probably don't want MS editors
> deciding for me what is most useful. And if I am looking for facts about
> the
>
> government or whatever, I especially don't want humans with an agenda, any
> agenda, filtering for me. I have a brain that I trust to do that filtering.
> It's one thing for a company to want to conrol a market; it's another when
> it
> tries to control what you know.
>
>
> So what, you may say? Just don't use it, if you don't want paid results.
> Trust me, I don't and I won't. This was strictly in the line of duty. I
> will
>
> never use it again, and I will explain to everyone I know what I found out
> about MSN Search. But if they bought Google? Then what?
>
>
> So, now you know what Microsoft thinks a search engine should be: just
> another
> way to use customers to get a competitive advantage. They have no concept
> of
>
> the public interest, I discern, from the design of their search engine.
> It's
>
> all about Microsoft and their friends. That same blind spot is likely what
> keeps them from understanding the value of the GPL and the freedoms it
> affords users.
>
>
> And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I use Google instead of MSN and will
> throw up if Microsoft buys Google. Then I will stop using Google. After
> that,
> some genius or other will just write another search algorithm and I'll use
> that search engine instead. I hope you are working on it now, actually,
> whoever you are. Release it under the GPL, will you, so Microsoft et al
> can't
> buy it and ruin it? That's the thing about freedom. Humans just can't stop
> wanting it. We're wired that way.
>
>
> If Microsoft were not a monopoly, and if they didn't have MSN set as the
> default search engine, maybe n
>
> ____________________________
> NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> Fair Use -
> because it's either fair use or useless....
> NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
> ____________________________
> NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> Fair Use -
> because it's either fair use or useless....
> NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
