Happy Birthday Google

[madinaz]

Google turned 10 years old! Larry Page and Sergey Brin founded Google Inc. on Sept. 7, 1998 and changed the net forever. Anyway I was poking around and check how weird google looked 10 years ago.

http://web.archive.org/web/19981111183552/google.stanford.edu

 

[allyrob]

Boy Google certainly has come a long way since they started 10 years ago, i had a look at the archive and i had a good laugh when i see what they were 10 years ago.

 

[ifwearner]

They'll probably own America in another 10 years. Like that company from Idiocracy or Wall-E.

 

[highfish]

Happy birthday google. You did a lot of bad lately but as soon as iam thinking back to ad loaden altavista and bad search results at metacrawler iam still fond of your basic interface and good serch results!

 

[Diabolik]

I officially nominate this as gayest thread on BHW EVER!

Why not celebrate Hitler's birthday and Jeffrey Dahmer's first zombie experiment while we're at it?

 

[hamada_masrawy]

I find it really weird that whenever a company gets bigger,it becomes really hated just like Microsoft and Walmart...

 

[Diabolik]

Good for you noob...now if you knew about what a pain in the ass their browser is for some of our techniques, you might get a clue. I don't have any problems with Walmart or Microsoft as they're not infringing on my income.

 

[highfish]

now if you knew about what a pain in the ass their browser is for some of our techniques, you might get a clue.

I searched the forums a little bit about that subject and actually found only one short statement about meta-refresh and even header refresh not working with chrome, altough i can't believe that. What are the issues with chrome?

 

[Diabolik]

That's a pretty major one right there if you do any black hat CPA.

 

[Whisker]

Good for you noob...now if you knew about what a pain in the ass their browser is for some of our techniques, you might get a clue. I don't have any problems with Walmart or Microsoft as they're not infringing on my income.

Yeah, that is going to be an issue for a lot of us once the browser gains popularity; it will because they control a huge % of traffic and have lots of trust so people are probably going to use it. The denial of blank referrers that Chrome so dubiously practices for whatever reason is the main problem so far. Delivery based upon referrer seems like the way to go from now on, whereas you would show one 'intended' page to inspectors, and another for your main converting traffic eliminating the need to actually blank the referrer.

Oh yeah happy birthday,
ǝlƃooƃ-noʎ-ʞɔnɟ

 

[highfish]

The denial of blank referrers that Chrome so dubiously practices for whatever reason is the main problem so far.

Well its harsh to say but the reason is very obvious: your techniques.
But whats the advantage in blank referrers anyway? Iam a seo, im noob so I might not get it, but whats wrong with an referrer?

 

[Diabolik]

So you're saying we'll have to block all people who use chrome? That will kill conversions once the thing catches on. Maybe there's a javascript workaround that will at least salvage some of that traffic.

 

[Whisker]

Well its harsh to say but the reason is very obvious: your techniques.
But whats the advantage in blank referrers anyway? Iam a seo, im noob so I might not get it, but whats wrong with an referrer?

Nothing is wrong with it. There are a few different reasons why you would choose to blank the referrer, it's been discussed many times around the forum. Say I create a killer converting lander or bridge page, and to keep it out of the networks hands you don't show the referrer. What if I don't want a network to see my traffic for whatever reason? This can be resolved by what I mentioned in my previous post, whether you understand that or not I'm not sure.

So you're saying we'll have to block all people who use chrome? That will kill conversions once the thing catches on. Maybe there's a javascript workaround that will at least salvage some of that traffic.

Yes it will kill conversions which is why i'm saying use a page that will show different content based on where the visitor came from, therefore you don't need to blank and it's still protected from prying eyes. This is not exactly a breeze to accomplish, but it's a possible solution to the issue.

 

[Diabolik]

Oh yeah, I know what you're saying...I already have a script that does that. Just want to make sure it's fail safe.

 

[highfish]

Nothing is wrong with it. There are a few different reasons why you would choose to blank the referrer, it's been discussed many times around the forum. Say I create a killer converting lander or bridge page, and to keep it out of the networks hands you don't show the referrer. What if I don't want a network to see my traffic for whatever reason? This can be resolved by what I mentioned in my previous post, whether you understand that or not I'm not sure.

I got that one and I've read about the reasons and the techniques how to blank a referrer, its always either client or serverside redirection. But a blank referrer will give away your intensions, so it will raise red flags, wont it?
I don't understand the reason why you would have a blank referrer in any scenario, if you don't want your pages to show up, double redirect or something so the referrer won't be emtpy and nobody will find out about the orginal site, right?

Something like this:

1. Landing Page => 2. Very convincing looking site for aff => 3. aff

2. The content on this site is made for the affiliate: Little bit of information about the product etc. and a aff. link. If called with a certain parameter it just redirects, this is how you redirect from site #1. If no or a false parameter is given it doesnt redirect.

Well I dont know if iam overlooked something stupid in my post but i think this should basically work and was described here often. Is what i wrote plainly stupid or are there reasons you really want your referrer to be blank?

 

[madinaz]

I officially nominate this as gayest thread on BHW EVER!

Why not celebrate Hitler's birthday and Jeffrey Dahmer's first zombie experiment while we're at it?

Wow! I can't believe you think it's gayer than this post.

http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/blackhat-lounge/24705-so-i-may-have-go-jail.html

 

[highfish]

Wow! I can't believe you think it's gayer than this post.

http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/blackhat-lounge/24705-so-i-may-have-go-jail.html

That is gay! Maybe someone can monetize that tough "GayJail.com" or something like this...