Google Wants to Rank Websites Based on Facts Not Links

Status
Not open for further replies.
CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Google could be getting ready to explore the possibilities of switching its ranking system from the number of incoming links to one that counts the number of incorrect facts on the website. There’s a lot of websites out there that will have to scramble to be rated at all if Google indeed does opt to switch to the trustworthiness scale for rankings. :D

A Google research team is adapting that model to measure the trustworthiness of a page, rather than its reputation across the web. Instead of counting incoming links, the system – which is not yet live – counts the number of incorrect facts within a page.
Click to expand...
 
Do you think there should be some kind of user-based ranking system, like what reddit does? I would really love to downvote anything with the words Gamergate, Kotaku, etc.
 
Maybe google should also rank sites based on if the mods delete posts from the forum for no reason...
 
Does this mean Creationism websites will cease to appear on Google?
 
My thoughts were maybe Huffpo and yahoo will stop popping up on the front page of every single search I do now!
 
Good bye Fox, The Daily, New York Post, Info Wars, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson? (Among others?) ;)
 
Who gets to determine what is fact and what isn't?
Is Global Warming going to be considered a fact and all evidence against it considered non-sense?
 
Taldren said:
Who gets to determine what is fact and what isn't?
Is Global Warming going to be considered a fact and all evidence against it considered non-sense?
Click to expand...
Facts are irrefutable and essentially define things. The only people who disagree with facts are crazy people and politicians. Global warming isn't a fact so much as a probable conclusion based on lots of observed evidence. Facts would be things like "these temperatures were recorded at these sites on these dates", "these are satellite photos of Anarctica at these dates" etc.

I don't know what Google has in mind, but I would think the easiest way to do this is downgrade sites that have been proven to put out false information, repeatedly.
 
tetris42 said:
Facts are irrefutable and essentially define things. The only people who disagree with facts are crazy people and politicians. Global warming isn't a fact so much as a probable conclusion based on lots of observed evidence. Facts would be things like "these temperatures were recorded at these sites on these dates", "these are satellite photos of Anarctica at these dates" etc.

I don't know what Google has in mind, but I would think the easiest way to do this is downgrade sites that have been proven to put out false information, repeatedly.
Click to expand...

But what is the temperature? The temperatures are different depending on which (official) organization you ask.
 
I'm curious to see how this ranking system evaluates context of statements. So if a site claims Fox News published such and such, when whatever content that publication contained was false, does it get marked down? Can similar constructions be teased apart to determine what, exactly, is being claimed well enough?

And do these supposed repositories of facts become the new battleground in the war for web visibility?
 
I will flood my sites with 1=1, 2=2, 3=3 ... and it will be highly ranked site n the internet.
 
Kor said:
It speaks volumes that your concern is that all of the conservative pandering sites will disappear under such a scenario.
Click to expand...
Because no one has ever claimed that the truth tends to be liberal, right? :p
 
westrock2000 said:
But what is the temperature? The temperatures are different depending on which (official) organization you ask.
Click to expand...
I meant SOURCE temperatures. What you're describing are the temperatures that different organizations report BASED on that data. So in other words, one organization could report one figure, one could report another, both would be legitimate so long as they were using good data.

However, if one source wasn't even using data, or making undeniable errors from it (2 + 2 = 5 level stuff) I imagine that would would go down in ranking.
 
Taldren said:
Is Global Warming going to be considered a fact and all evidence against it considered non-sense?
Click to expand...
Anthropogenic climate change denialism roughly groups into 3 categories:

  1. it isn't happening
  2. it's happening, but humans aren't responsible for it
  3. it's happening and humans are responsible, but maybe it won't be so bad
I imagine that group 1 and most of group 2 websites would suffer from the fact-based ranking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top