@Deuchnord @CodingThunder @gamingonlinux I think what makes me angry isn't that they did it, if they delisted all their web garbage or were just trying to make a point about how bad it is that this is absurdly easy to do, like, yeah. Google wastes resources on obviously bad idea products and neglects the one thing they made that people actually like.
But like... He's just proud. Like a speedrunner who just found an infinite money glitch. He thinks he struck gold.
@Deuchnord @gamingonlinux Yeah that's so so unethical especially when you are simply feeding LLM/AI crap to people looking for legitamate problems. I would definitely never even consider any product from such an unethical company ever.
Also the web now is such a mess and still many wonder why adblockers exist.ckers is not at all possible for someone who has to use the internet for majority of his stuff. Yeah many good creators get punished by this, but imagining web without adblo
@mdiluz
I was thinking exactly the same, where do these people get these ideas? What happened? Oh wait, profit, right?
SEO is the industrialisation of a race to the bottom in an information economy, performed by nerds who only are valued in an information economy.
The thing is... is there even any profit or gain in this?
Are the people visiting shitty AI generated articles actually buying anything or clicking on Ads or whatever?
If not, what's the point?
Or is it just yet another grift where he can use this as evidence to sell some kind of course or service where he helps others to do the same?
Which on it's own is a fairly useless metric.
Are people staying and reading the articles? Or are they immediately closing and bouncing away to something else?
Anyone doing anything serious with data on the internet will know that kind of stuff, so if they're not telling you what engagement is like it's likely because it's bad.
People like this are polluting the internet and ruining search just to get a bigger meaningless number.
@adaliabooks @gamingonlinux I agree with all of the above. I’m pointing out the limitations of using shallow metrics to measure performance and success. Which success is likely tied to money rewards.
If there’s no measurement to distinguish crap traffic from useful traffic then it’s all “good traffic”.
I wasn't meaning that post as an attack on what you'd said. Sorry if it sounded like it was.
@dalias @gamingonlinux likely that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Back when everyone was impressed about Google's reaction to ChatGPT and taking that as a sign that Google feared a competitor coming up with a better interface to search I kept wondering why nobody saw the much more immediate thread of LLMs used for SEO...
@gamingonlinux >We got 489,509 traffic in October alone
If I inject 3 traffic today, is this how it ends?
It worries me that some people believe it's ok to brag about these shitty behaviours & attitudes in the open (It most certainly means that they have a wide audience who also believe the same; which is even worse than the publicised fact in itself).
