look what gets pagerank of specific articles set to 0
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=megan+meier+site%3Aencyclopediadramatica.com
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=rob+levin+site%3Aencyclopediadramatica.com
I would just like to point out that "not evil" has turned into "not funny"
The pagerank stoning of the Megan Meier and Rob Levin articles is proof that all the Google founders' talk about not altering the pagerank of specific results is a load of garbage. Google is becoming a gigantic PC censorship authority.
It does appear hilarious that ED is considered worse than a virulent anti-semite conspiracy theorist by Google.
Web 2.0 culture generates a lot of talk about the urgency of net neutrality, that forcing people to pay based upon application layer content is unjust and violates the spirit of the Internet. They sure don't back it up with their actions. With the major search competitors it increasingly seems like you are only allowed to publish if your content is approved by committee. Verizon has never monitored nor cared about the content of my phonecalls. The USPS has never looked inside my mail. But Google plays with pagerank, all the while screaming about how not evil they are because they don't directly alter pagerank. Why should we give companies a blank check for bandwidth when they're guiltier of the same crime they accuse the telecommunications companies of?
So if you want to make jokes on the Internet don't make light of a man who collected tens of thousands of dollars for "open source development" and spent it on his own interests, never contributing a single line of code to any open source project. Nor can you talk about dead kids. The Google machine does not approve!
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=rob+levin+site%3Aencyclopediadramatica.com
I would just like to point out that "not evil" has turned into "not funny"
The pagerank stoning of the Megan Meier and Rob Levin articles is proof that all the Google founders' talk about not altering the pagerank of specific results is a load of garbage. Google is becoming a gigantic PC censorship authority.
It does appear hilarious that ED is considered worse than a virulent anti-semite conspiracy theorist by Google.
Web 2.0 culture generates a lot of talk about the urgency of net neutrality, that forcing people to pay based upon application layer content is unjust and violates the spirit of the Internet. They sure don't back it up with their actions. With the major search competitors it increasingly seems like you are only allowed to publish if your content is approved by committee. Verizon has never monitored nor cared about the content of my phonecalls. The USPS has never looked inside my mail. But Google plays with pagerank, all the while screaming about how not evil they are because they don't directly alter pagerank. Why should we give companies a blank check for bandwidth when they're guiltier of the same crime they accuse the telecommunications companies of?
So if you want to make jokes on the Internet don't make light of a man who collected tens of thousands of dollars for "open source development" and spent it on his own interests, never contributing a single line of code to any open source project. Nor can you talk about dead kids. The Google machine does not approve!