I use Chrome and its Block sites extension. My search results are now
getting quite good in returning signal vs noise. I only wish Google allowed
this natively in their search results that way the general public can vote
these concepts down on either a per account level or global.


---
Regards,
Scott Barnes
http://www.riagenic.com


On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:09 PM, noonie <[email protected]> wrote:

> Or those bot-automated monstrosities that crawl the web for legitimate
> sites that score highly in SEO and then scape phrases and sentences
> into a mash-up that looks legitimate in Google/Bing results but end up
> being totally incomprehensible. These score highly as they consist of
> real content on (tens) of thousands of static html pages but every
> link is a click-through to advertising.
>
> --
> Regards,
> noonie
>
> On 14 July 2011 15:16, Greg Keogh <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>If you fancy a flight to Perth and back you can borrow it for the
> weekend,
> >> but I need it back by the 27th. :)
> >
> >
> >
> > After an hour of searching and searching and searching (I think search
> > engines are broken!) I finally found a place about 4 suburbs away from
> home
> > that will do a weekend deal for the projector and screen for $150 from
> > Friday to Monday. The worst thing in web searching these days are those
> > “fake search engine” sites that intercept your request, reformat it
> > unreadably and recommend stupid results which are probably just paid
> > advertising. I think there was some furore a few months ago when Google
> said
> > they’d block these irritating sites in their search results. I hope they
> do.
> >
> >
> >
> > It’s not Friday, but here is a quiz question I’m going to ask people on
> > Saturday night. Using only mental calculations and guestimates ...
> >
> >
> >
> > If our sun was the size of grain of coarse beach sand (about 0.7mm
> across),
> > at that scale how far would it be to our close neighbour star Alpha
> Centauri
> > where the Space Family Robinson blasted off for back in 1997?
> >
> >
> >
> > Greg
>

Reply via email to