Lets Beat Google - I need 15 volunteers

P. S. I can tell you 1 thing:
Google WILL WIN!

This isn't really about beating google, its just more a power trip for yourself so you can be in charge. With "your rules" and "your choices".

Your secret network as already been infiltrated, you just don't know who it is.

My name is Matt Cutts, can I join please?

Being honest, I think that ttmschine needs to look into product protection services like Markmonitor.com that Google pays so much money to. Then ttmschine needs to ask why the world largest data miner hires the second largest data miner and analyst? The look into Crunchbase (107.20.0.0/14) and Techcrunch (AOL - Time Warner).

All links are traceable, this means that all link networks are traceable.

I've decided to can this idea - thanks

I've decided to can this idea - thanks

I already know what Google is doing and how to beat them without a blog network. I think all blog networks will go down someday. They are too easy to trace.

Sounds ok, but really if we join, we're only getting 4 links from other sites and two from our own. Not that great. you would need to expand it a fair bit to make it worth while.

SEODEMON said:

I already know what Google is doing and how to beat them without a blog network. I think all blog networks will go down someday. They are too easy to trace.

Click to expand...

Exactly. There already is a way to beat Google and bank. The thing is, the people who I know are doing this aren't blabbing about it on a forum(s).

Good luck on OP's idea though.

Matt cutts is one of the owners of blackhatworld. bet you didnt know that. Anyways right now he knows all the people you accepted and what domains to hit when you do set them up. Your private messages are being read as we speak. good luck

ttmschine said:

LoL I added that deliberately because I want people with open minds not American idiots whose ideals of patriotism override every fibre of common sense and can be bought with the suggestion they might be unpatriotic.

If they can get past the idea they might be a communist and still want to take part they're alright by me.

Click to expand...

The immaturity displayed right here proofs to me that it is failed before it starts.

ttmschine said:

I'm sorry you're just talking utter nonsense.

There are Trillions of links within the net, in order to be able to understand them all and who does what with who, you'd need to know who created each link and who was working with who in whatever format you care to think about.

Your statement pre-supposes that Google must therefore know about all links and who is responsible for them, therefore there would be no need for algorithm updates, or any algorithm at all for that matter, since they would be able to identify "false" links and eliminate them at will.

Clearly no one knows this, least of all Google, it is impossible to quantify.

Click to expand...

You would be incorrect in your AssUMeing. I am making the assumption that you are not familiar with data mining methods and statistical analysis. Therein lies the fault with your proposal; if it is on a network, it can be traced. Google is a network and a data miner. They hire other data miners to analyze their data as well as analyzing it themselves.

So, while still being somewhat opaque and oblique. Computers do nothing more than add and subtract. Basic addition and subtraction is built up into other math functions such as multiplication and division, which are then again built up into Algebra, Trigonometry, Calculus, Statistics, and Discrete math. Calculus is the study of numbers. Statistics is the analysis of the pattern of numbers and the prediction of patterns of numbers. Discrete Math is a singular point of a number fixed in time and a logical application of that singularity.

You are attempting to remove discrete math from the method when your method relies on the uniqueness of the discrete point and that point is understandable, predictable, and built on simpler math. Your computer is nothing more than a glorified adding machine. A network is nothing more than a glorified mathematical pattern.

I would suggest that you look into Dijkstra's algorithm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijkstra's_algorithm

JustUs said:

I would suggest that you look into Dijkstra's algorithm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dijkstra's_algorithm

Click to expand...

With all respect, I would submit that you look into graph complexity (BigO)

phracktl said:

With all respect, I would submit that you look into graph complexity (BigO)

Click to expand...

With all due respect, Fibonacci and Binary heaps reduce this from O(1) or O(n) to O(log n). From there you throw hardware. Can you name someone that has more hardware than Google. But rather than using a Breadth First Algo, you can just as easily run a Depth First algo; or better yet run them in parallel while using a self balancing red black tree. The OP is speaking of a self balancing red black tree. Those forests are susceptible to analysis.

Note: Quick sort and Heap sort runs at O(n log n), but worst case for Quick sort is O(n^2) while the upper bound on Heapsort is 0(n log n).

ttmschine said:

I think you're wrong - you see a link service that is a network advertised on BHW and sign up - your links get distributed across the network.

In the meantime Matt Cutts or one of his acolytes signs up and gives them a website that is also distributed across the network.

He checks to see where the links to the Google site are coming from, checks all of the other sites on those websites that also get links, then checks where else those sites get links from - rinse, repeat, and before you know it you have a big network where lots of sites have links to lots of the same sites and it's obvious, cue destruction.

Pay for a public service where anyone can join and all sites and all links can be identified probably in minutes with Googles resources. It is the public availability that is the source of the leak.

In my version they do the same thing, find the links from 1 cell, the other 3, 5, 9, 999 cells are untouched.

Result: Webmasters 10 - 0 Google.

The end.

Click to expand...

PrinceVisi said:

One Hint for you:

The only way to "beat" Google is to build a private blog network by yourself and no one else.

Different IPs, Host, Nameservers, CMS.

I am only starting out myself, but will be the best SEO investment of all and it will be Zoo Proof.

Click to expand...

@ttmschine - I admire your ambition and determination, as well as what appears to be somewhat of a leadership trait - but I'm still concerned that allowing so many people in on what you're doing will lead to your downfall.

@PrinceVisi - This is exactly my thoughts...more people = more problems...Humans are unreliable.

ProSEO Show said:

@ttmschine - I admire your ambition and determination, as well as what appears to be somewhat of a leadership trait - but I'm still concerned that allowing so many people in on what you're doing will lead to your downfall.

@PrinceVisi - This is exactly my thoughts...more people = more problems...Humans are unreliable.

Click to expand...

trust no humans Private Network - all other lifeforms may join in..

Good luck everyone, G (adwords + adsense) kicked me in 2010

Now that I have demonstrated why I personally believe that the OP idea is flawed and easily detectable, I would like to suggest a course of action that I believe would be undetectable for the time being and does not delve into hyped quantum states, but also incorporates the OP's idea.

Combine the OP's general idea, but decentralize it. Now combine that idea with Chaos theory, using the MandelBrot set, and then combine it with Multi time dimension math and String theory. If someone could conceive of how to do this, you would have the search engines confounded for quite some time because the very act of observing the network would change it.

This is a great idea, maybe I can apply this to Germany.