← Back to context

Comment by vgeek

2 months ago

The same thing happens every 3-5 years. HowStuffWorks, About.com (now like 10 different domains), many IAC acquired properties, RedVenture sites, even random sites like LiveStrong.com will be wildly prominent when the domains historically aren't relevant or authoritative for a given niche.

Even recently, sites like CNN were using subdomains with affiliate offers managed by third parties(1). These sites weren't being de-ranked algorithmically-- someone at Google would have to apply a manual action to remove them from the SERPs. What incentive would there be to do so if a prior agreement was in place?

Google doesn't really care about discoverability for smaller domains that may have good content. They are either being risk averse (avoiding potential spammers, junk AI content) by favoring trusted domains, favoring brands who are likely to spend on display or search ads, or maybe a combination of these.

1) https://searchengineland.com/google-begins-enforcement-of-si...

It's really frustrating. I currently want to buy a mattress and a refrigerator. The results for those are so awful as to be useless.

  • A lot of classic software essentially worked more like a database. In the last 10-15 years it's all moving to an algorithm.

    Here is what I mean. Photos apps used to let you search through your photos using filters.

    The same kinds of things are happening on the web which already happened to apps (desktop and mobile).

    In the modern world, some marketing company wants to tell YOU which of YOUR photos you wanted, so they can sell you some prints, harvest your data, or something.

    I would like any apps that have to do with collections of files, photos, music, etc to be more of a deterministic DATABASE and less of a nondeterministic algorithm.

    • > A lot of classic software essentially worked more like a database. In the last 10-15 years it's all moving to an algorithm.

      You just described what I missed about the older software. Older software gives users control over sorting and show data in a tabular format. Modern software sorts data with an algorithm, with ads mixed in, and shows data in a card format, making it a lot less usable.

      16 replies →

    • Deterministic software puts the user in control of the product. Nondeterministic algos put the products in control of the user. Naturally companies want the latter and under guises of the ‘now better’ give the user worse and charge them more. A new generation isn’t even aware they’re being fleeced because they don’t have anything to compare with. And the frog boils slowly…

      6 replies →

    • Reminds of Windows and search. I am not anymore even sure if there is some nice dialog where I could put some pattern and folder or list of folder and have it run through it for me...

      3 replies →

  • I got so frustrated trying to find some shelves recently that I ended up building them myself. It used to be that I could use Google to find some furniture stores, but now they all require me to throughly vet them to make sure they aren’t just reselling stuff from China or scam sites. Ikea still works, but that’s about it unless I go to big designer brands where a shelf will cost me a gazillion DKR. Unfortunately Ikea didn’t have any shelves that I liked, which is why I build them out of some wood I purchased in the local hardware store.

    It’s so annoying that it’s almost impossible to find a legitimate store. Well maybe that’s not the correct way to word it. It’s so frustrating that it’s almost impossible to know whether or not the top shops you get in your search results are stores you want to use or not.

    • It's bad enough that manufacturers in China might start complaining about it as the best manufacturers there have a reputation to protect.

      There is a mushroom grower in Shanghai, for instance, which grows very inexpensive but tasty beech mushrooms in a giant vertical farm where workers only touch the mushrooms with a forklift (see https://www.finc-sh.com/en/about.aspx#fincvideo)

      There are numerous photography equipment vendors in China that make innovative and value-conscious products (like this inexpensive manual focus lens which takes pictures like you've never seen: https://7artisans.store/products/50mm-f1-05) that excel in customer support. They post real manuals to their web sites where you can easily find them, they correspond to you with email and not a ticket system behind a CAPTCHA, they don't have a huge list of unauthorized vendors for whom they won't support your product if you bought from them, etc. I hear back from them in 24 hours most of the time compared to an Italian vendor that makes great tripods but takes more like four days to respond.

      If Chinese vendors are working that hard to get my business I very much want to support them.

      2 replies →

    • I was looking for a product recently. I wanted to buy from a UK business.

      I found countless Web stores pretending to be UK businesses complete with founder stories and convincing copy... All turning out to be Chinese fronts.

      They know the tide is against them and see starting to employ some shady tactics to get sales.

      At the same time the big money in China is buying westernised historic brands to trade through.

      I'm not anti-China for goods and services, but I am against the deceptive practices I've been seeing.

    • > they aren’t just reselling stuff from China

      At this point everything you buy is from China in some way or the other. From iPhones to Nikes, from your electronic batteries to garlic. At this point stuff from China isn’t exactly a bad thing, considering how poorly things made elsewhere are doing. I have had so many issues with American made things that I almost prefer items made elsewhere. From cars to refrigerators.

      2 replies →

  • Mattresses have been especially bad for a long time. For refrigerators, you can look at consumer reports and wirecutter--and you can reasonably do some evaluation at your local big box appliance store. I wouldn't buy based on a random web search though.

    • > Mattresses have been especially bad for a long time.

      Yes. Refrigerators, at least, are made by a relatively small number of companies with established brands. They have EnergyStar ratings, and there's some objective evaluation.

      For mattresses, the whole industry is a scam. Mattresses actually cost about US$50 to US$80 in bulk. Search Alibaba. Almost all consumer-facing companies are resellers. Markups are huge. Essentially all the mattress review sites are paid promotions.

      6 replies →

    • Wirecutter's gone downhill after the NYT purchase as well. The Spruce seems somewhat better (but is also part of a huge web site family, so caveat emptor)

      Either you do deep research, or you find a trusted friend to advise you. The Internet is largely useless at this point.

      11 replies →

    • It has always felt to me that Wirecutter focuses on only one end of the Pareto curve ("what is the very best XXXX that money can buy, within reason") and ignores the middle of the curve where most people are actually shopping ("what is the best XXXX that I can get for $XXX"). It also seems to reliably ignore brands from Mainland China (Hisense, Midea, etc). I guess It makes obvious sense to court rich (or at least price-insensitive) readers.

      8 replies →

    • if there is a trial period better get cheapest and highly reviewed mattress. Even if it's a scam you get to know it within x days and can return it.

      I try to buy natural materials like latex or cotton - which cannot and are not mass produced (difficult to roll and transport from across the world)

  • If I want to buy something like that I set an alert on slickdeals.net Like everything else it used to be better years ago, but there are still some genuine great deals and lots of insight if you’re willing to sift through the comments.

    When I was looking for a fridge a year or so ago I heard that Samsung was trying to fix their bad appliance rep and quality of parts had gone up, but I went with a different brand.

    There’s been an issue the last few years of fiberglass escaping through the cover on memory foam mattresses. If I was mattress shopping I’d probably still get foam, but look for one without fiberglass or find some kind of allergy cover to at least contain it.

  • The only signal I use is warranty. So I tend to go to Costco, and avoid Samsung.

    • It's not a bad idea to pair that with lawsuits related to such warranties.

      Costco and Samsung are big enough that you can achieve reasonable signal.

      When your local car dealer offers you a full drivetrain warranty though (assuming it's a full warranty and not one of the other ways people are often fleeced), will they honor it when the lemon they sold you breaks the first time? the 2nd? the 3rd? Will they, instead, note that most people buying that car don't have much money (or, if you used any form of dealer financing, know for a fact you don't have much money) and require you to retain a lawyer and sue them to recover any damages?

      2 replies →

  • I got a mattress last year using Consumer Reports rec for most the mattress with the least synthetic chemicals. I am not going to say its name lest it look like I am shilling for them. I will say, it has been great.

    • If it's in a verifiable external source (Consumer Report for instance, not some lady's Amazon affiliate links blog), then I would say it's never shilling.

  • Having bought a mattress recently, it might be worth going to a mattress store. The sales process sucks, but if you want to find a mattress you like, it's hard to beat actually laying down on one.

    • It also can help you identify the kind you like (coil, latex, etc) and composition you like (layer style and thickness).

      Then you just search for those two things online.

      That's how I found an amazing natural latex cooling mattress online.

      And the best part is that most online mattress retailers have 90 day try out periods. We didn't like our first one, and instead of having us ship it back they told us to donate it and sent us the next to try. So now we have a really nice spare bedroom mattress as well as the perfect mattress in our bedroom.

      3 replies →

  • I want to add in case people think this is strictly a Google thing. DDG is equally terrible at finding this kind of thing. I didn't realize until I read this thread that I was suffering this same kind of issue. Its so painful trying to find on the internet.

  • It’s the same for pretty much any product category now. Affiliate marketing and Google using its monopoly to prioritize ads over search results has basically ruined search. It’s in their best interest to lower the quality of results because the ads get more useful comparatively.

    Gmail is next I predict. They have a monopoly over consumer email, so it’s revenue growth just waiting to be unlocked when times get tough. A higher percentage of your inbox is going to become paid Gmail ads and there’s nothing you’re going to do about it. Nobody wants to go to the hassle of changing their email address (the amount of boomers still on Yahoo mail is staggering).

  • May I ask why you use search engine for buying something like a mattress or refrigerator? I dont mean to sound that as an insult. I'm genuinely curious. I or anyone I know of will just go to a nearby store and checkout these items to buy. For things like these one would already know who sells these items, even online. So why not directly checkout those stores, either online or physical?

>The same thing happens every 3-5 years. [...] Google doesn't really care about discoverability for smaller domains that may have good content.

What's galling is that (ostensibly) they used to care. So much for "organizing the world's information" and "don't be evil".

  • Well they are certainly organizing the world's information, and continue to be incentivized to do so. Deeply. For advertisers.

I get flashbacks to the exodus of Digg, when the admins basically said "Look, we get a lot of junk content and a lot of common source content so we are going to start fast tracking the common source content from trusted providers"

We all know how that went over.

“The same thing happens every 3-5 years.”

This is so true. I remember when Demand Media was crushing it on Google in the early 2010s. Seem like they were everywhere, and then one day they weren’t.

Investopedia is another one. Same for bankrate.com Other ones included wikihow and genius.com