If there's one thing that has driven me nuts over the last 6 months it's the non-stop chatter and search...
Algorithm Updates vs Manual Penalties...
3 Quick Fixes to Enterprise-Level...
Link Pruning - is it...
In this video interview link building expert Jim Boykin explains[…]
Join Nick Mihailovski and Ikai Lan from the Analytics and[…]
Could you please give details on what should be included[…]
| The SEO Magic Bullet; 2011 Edition |
| Written by David Harry | |
| Thursday, 03 February 2011 13:53 | |
Keeping perspectiveAs the new year began we saw a deluge of the usual round up and 'best of' posts. One of these that I came across was talking about the BEST SEO post of 2010 and as their pick they chose Bill's reasonable surfer patent coverage. Ok great, Bill rocks, so what's the problem? Well, the problem my weary web warrior is that there was a story behind it all. The morning it came out Rand was at a conference (SMX London I believe) and stood up to proclaim this 'new' method from Google and madness ensued. My friends, there is no magic bullet and it's just bad form to go screaming from the mountaintops that which may or may not be the truth.
I have found the holy grail!The first thing to get your head around is that patents are the past and research papers are the future. Next, we need to consider that many patent awards are many years old and the tech was either used, evolved or abandoned altogether. And last, but most certainly NOT least, one has to have some context. Allow me to explain... How about this, I will write up just a single patent from Google on geo-local goodiness. Something somewhat recent. Let's use this one; Indexing documents according to geo-graphic relevance Of course I could really play this thing up and write a post that makes it seem like the hottest new thing that Google is doing. It was awarded in late 2010 so it must be something super secret and important right? Uh uh. It's just a single patent. You have no context. Here's a list of geo local patents from the last few years;
WOW... now THAT is what I call context! The point here being that even if I spent the time to group and then analyze ALL of those patents, I'd still be nowhere. We still don't know which elements were used. We haven't a clue as to the weighting of the various factors contained in each. In short, it's a fools game. Be the Wolf not the SheepleIf you're going to make a 2011 SEO Resolution, then make it one of thinking critically when you read some of the hyperbole that plagues the SEO (media) spaces. Reading and analyzing papers and patents from the major engines is about insight, not definitive answers. In most cases, especially last year's reasonable surfer fiasco, statements about any ONE filing should be taken with a grain of salt. There is no magic bullet to be found here (nothing to see, move along). If you REALLY want to learn about how search engines work, great. But never be fooled into thinking that any of us will ever be able to reverse engineer Google's algorithms. It's that simple. Anyone that tells you different is either lying or ignorant. Past Editions; The Magic Bullet - A chat with Bill Slawski - 2007 More articles by this author | |
| Last Updated on Thursday, 03 February 2011 14:10 |
Home - all the latest on SNC
SEO - our collection of SEO articles
Technical SEO - for the geeks
Latest News - latest news in search
Analytics - measure up and convert
RSS Rack - feeds from around the industry
Search - looking for something specific?
Authors - Author Login
SEO Training - Our sister site
Contact Us - get in touch with SNC
| Digital Marketing Weekly - Issue 4 Linked to last week's Google I/O event in San Francisco there is a lot of new features and updates [ ... ] | Playing with Google Conversational Search Earlier today Danny Sullivan, via SEL, was writing about Google Conversational search, which was an [ ... ] |
Comments
http://www.amandaorson.com/go/googleapp.pdf
On October 15th they entered a supplemental Preliminary Amendment including claims 25-43 which are substantively very similar to the above claims.
For those that aren't patent savvy, claims are the "meat" of a patent- without them, you have nothing to defend or 'claim' ownership to.
And, FYI, this is the inventor: http://www.google.com/programming-contest/winner.html
"It was awarded in late 2010 so it must be something super secret and important right?"
This is inaccurate.
This patent was PUBLISHED 9/30/10 and filed 6/15/10.
It's official status is "Application Dispatched from Preexam, Not Yet Docketed "
There is a HUGE distinction between applications being published and patents being awarded. I could file an application today claiming to have invented a hammer and my application will be PUBLISHED (unless you file a document specifically requesting them not to, called a "Non Publication Request") but I most certainly won't get a patent for it.
As always, this is spot on:
"Reading and analyzing papers and patents from the major engines is about insight, not definitive answers."
There have been some patents from places like Google that spot on in their description, and what ends up being developed by the search engine, like the handful of patents that described how Google personalized search would be set up. But, most patents provide information about processes that aren't so clear and transparent, and are difficult to tell if they've been implemented.
I don't usually read patents or white papers to tell how a search engine does something. I read them to come up with questions that I might not have considered asking without having read those patents or papers.
@Tad - we should open a new agency; Red Ryder SEO
@Bill - hey bro, nice to see ya. I remember when we started this 'series' back in 07, oddly it seems not a whole lot has changed out there as far as the perceptions of patents/papers and how the SEO media uses it.
I certainly agree on that last part about questions. Many times I end up much the same. Finding things in an offering that leads me to dig deeper into a given methodology and how I might find some actionable elements to test/research. And well, end of the day, it's just fascinating to consider the task of indexing the world's information. It never get's old.
RSS feed for comments to this post