▲ 1047 ▼ Google is losing it (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by kokesh@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 153 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] credo@lemmy.world -21 points 2 years ago (2 children) It’s not A/B testing if they aren’t getting feedback. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] otter@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Wouldn't they be? They could measure how likely it is that someone clicks on the generated link/text permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] credo@lemmy.world -17 points 2 years ago* (2 children) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] IllNess@infosec.pub 31 points 2 years ago What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads. This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google's for the former is what got us into this hell hole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you're seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more. permalink fedilink source parent [–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago Google runs passive A/B testing all the time. If you're using a Google service there's a 99% chance you're part of some sort of internal test of changes. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] otter@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Wouldn't they be? They could measure how likely it is that someone clicks on the generated link/text permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] credo@lemmy.world -17 points 2 years ago* (2 children) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] IllNess@infosec.pub 31 points 2 years ago What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads. This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google's for the former is what got us into this hell hole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you're seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] credo@lemmy.world -17 points 2 years ago* (2 children) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] IllNess@infosec.pub 31 points 2 years ago What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads. This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan. permalink fedilink source parent [–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google's for the former is what got us into this hell hole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you're seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IllNess@infosec.pub 31 points 2 years ago What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads. This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google's for the former is what got us into this hell hole. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you're seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you're seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago Google runs passive A/B testing all the time. If you're using a Google service there's a 99% chance you're part of some sort of internal test of changes. permalink fedilink source parent