this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2024
112 points (97.5% liked)

Privacy

31982 readers
320 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Google apparently accidentally posted a big stash of internal technical documents to GitHub, partially detailing how the search engine ranks webpages.

For most of us, the question of search rankings is just "are my web results good or bad," but the SEO community is both thrilled to get a peek behind the curtain and up in arms since the docs apparently contradict some of what Google has told them in the past.

Google confirmed the authenticity of the documents to The Verge, saying, “We would caution against making inaccurate assumptions about Search based on out-of-context, outdated, or incomplete information.

The fun thing about accidentally publishing to the GoogleAPI GitHub is that, while these are sensitive internal documents, Google technically released them under an Apache 2.0 license.

That means anyone who stumbled across the documents was granted a "perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license" to them, so these are freely available online now, like here.

Both bits of commentary from the SEO experts make them sound offended that Google would ever mislead them, but doesn't the company need to maintain at least a slightly adversarial relationship with the people who try to manipulate the search results?


The original article contains 604 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 67%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!