In the Mood - 05/03/2002
One of the idées du moment: the manipulation of Google ranking through weblogs.
Do search specialists already use weblogs to influence Google rankings ? Does the weblog network have already the concept of the valuable writers you can link to, giving them more influence on google ? In other words, is it wrong to influence google through daily ramblings and how long will it work before there is a correction ?
Do search specialists already use weblogs to influence Google rankings ? Does the weblog network have already the concept of the valuable writers you can link to, giving them more influence on google ? In other words, is it wrong to influence google through daily ramblings and how long will it work before there is a correction ?
Speaking of search results, according to Scientology in
Google, there should be more links like Scientology - aka Dianetics - to be sure that people understand that it is based on work by L.
Ron Hubbard
(via /.)
On the other hand, there is no mention of monopoly when you do a search on Microsoft in Google. And looking for God does bring a strange result
On Beeb, a Cocoon+Xindice powered weblog-engine, Ugo is playing with XUL. Speaking of XUL, the XUL book seems really interesting.
Read on a banner: 
Blosxom, a simple tool in Perl to write on the web.
The other talk of the moment or another try at the endless question of the meaning of blog, what brillant future it will have and of course what is a weblog ?
Apart from the usual idea that writing everyday makes a better writer, there is nothing about the sociological/political/whatever-cal fact that if almost everybody can write and express their opinions (or lack of) on the mighty web with an egal exposure to Google and other readers (modulo the gatekeeping A-List), what is mass media after that ?
Basically, will the weblog factors - production & distribution cost are really as low as they can possibly be for personal internet publishing and daily writing is addictive, just as reading RSS feeds - be a bootstrap to better original amateur content than the traditionnal and static homepage that has shown its limits ?
Originally published as jemisa.editthispage.com/discuss/msgReader$370
Apart from the usual idea that writing everyday makes a better writer, there is nothing about the sociological/political/whatever-cal fact that if almost everybody can write and express their opinions (or lack of) on the mighty web with an egal exposure to Google and other readers (modulo the gatekeeping A-List), what is mass media after that ?
Basically, will the weblog factors - production & distribution cost are really as low as they can possibly be for personal internet publishing and daily writing is addictive, just as reading RSS feeds - be a bootstrap to better original amateur content than the traditionnal and static homepage that has shown its limits ?
#
05 mars 2002
