FC: A blessedly dumb idea: Google should be a regulated "utility!"

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sun Sep 08 2002 - 22:22:46 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: An anti-war, peace anthem for September 11"

    [A website becomes popular, thus it must be "regulated?" By the Federal 
    Department of Software Quality, perhaps? Words fail me. --Declan]
    
    ---
    
    Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 12:25:29 -0700
    From: "Jeffrey St. Clair" <sitkaat_private>
    To: CP List <counterpunch-listat_private>,
        Dave Marsh <marsh6at_private>, Declan McCullagh <declanat_private>
    Subject: Brandt: Google's Original Sin
    
    
    PageRank: Google's Original Sin
    
    by Daniel Brandt
    August 2002
    http://www.google-watch.org/pagerank.html
    
    [...]
    
    PageRank must be streamlined so that the "tyranny of the
    rich" characteristics are scaled down in favor of a more
    egalitarian approach to link popularity. This would greatly
    simplify the complex and recursive calculations that are now
    required to rank two billion web pages, which must be very
    expensive for Google. The crawl must not be PageRank driven.
    There should be a way for Google to arrange the crawl so
    that if a site cannot be fully covered in one cycle,
    Google's crawlers can pick up where they left off on the
    next cycle.
    
    Google is so important to the web these days, that it
    probably ought to be a public utility. Regulatory interest
    from agencies such as the FTC is entirely appropriate, but
    we feel that the FTC addressed only the most blatant abuses
    among search engines. Google, which only recently began
    using sponsored links and ad boxes, was not even an object
    of concern to the Ralph Nader group, Commercial Alert, that
    complained to the FTC.
    
    This was a mistake, because Commercial Alert failed to look
    closely enough at PageRank. Some aspects of PageRank, as
    presently implemented by Google, are nearly as pernicious as
    pay for placement. There is no question that the FTC should
    regulate advertising agencies that parade as search engines,
    in the interests of protecting consumers. Google is still a
    search engine, but not by much. They can remain a search
    engine only by fixing PageRank's worst features.
    
    _________________
    
    Daniel Brandt is founder and president of Public Information
    Research, Inc., a tax-exempt public charity that sponsors
    NameBase. He began compiling NameBase in 1982, from material
    that he started collecting in 1974, and is now the
    programmer and webmaster for PIR's several sites. He
    participates in various forums where webmasters share
    observations about the often-secretive algorithms, bugs, and
    behavior of various search engines. Brandt has been watching
    Google's interaction with NameBase ever since Google, in
    October, 2000, became the first search engine to go "deep"
    on PIR's main site by crawling thousands of dynamic pages.
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
    CNET Radio 9:40 am ET weekdays: http://cnet.com/broadband/0-7227152.html
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 08 2002 - 22:54:45 PDT