Ask HN: Is Someone Hijacking Google Images?
http://yyrfm.microdeo.de/spectrum_analyser_circuit_diagram.php
https://4.twizer.co/rf-spectrum-analyzer-schematic.html
http://5.6.gvapor.nl/rf_spectrum_analyzer_schematic.php
http://18.10.ulrich-temme.de/spectrum_analyzer_schematic_symbols.php
http://4.3.beckman-vitamin-d.de/vcr_tuner_based_rf_spectrum_analyzer_schematic.php
http://18.10.ulrich-temme.de/spectrum_analyzer_schematic_symbols.php
http://2.4.wohnungzumieten.de/gbppr_1_ghz_spectrum_analyzer_second_local_oscillator_schematic.php
http://5.6.gvapor.nl/rf_spectrum_analyzer_schematic.php
http://13.1.starpartybus.com/lm3915_spectrum_analyzer_schematic.php
Edit: it appears those pages are being slowly buried by legit results, but some of them still surface although much deeper.
Examples:
http://3.17.tierarztpraxis-ruffy.de/pna_x_block_diagram.php
http://10.10.artatec-automobile.de/block_diagram_power_antenna_wire.php
http://9.20.wohnungzumieten.de/logic_probe_with_sound_circuit_schematic.php
7.12.gvapor.nl/dds_function_generator_mcu_schematic.php
Note that I searched for the same exact phrase as above.
73 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 152 ms ] threadNot necessarily saying this happened on the user end though, I just outlined how it could happen.
http://2.8.combatarms-game.de/pna_x_block_diagram.php
https://two.ineedmorespace.co/2020_radar_block_diagram.php
http://3.17.tierarztpraxis-ruffy.de/pna_x_block_diagram.php
I had to take out doubles as some of these urls were returned identical although I was clicking on different images.
it keeps you on google.com
but you still get your markets search results and your language (thx europes "right to be forgotten" for the decline of /ncr functionality)
I have been noticing a very painful decline in Google results with more content not labeled as ads but clearly placed due to a metric other than usefulness. I routinely find myself multiple pages deep in searches, which never used to happen.
Mark my words, this is purposeful on googles end, either directly through some kind of ordering affiliate or indirectly through some kind of seo partnership
https://www.blog.google/products/ads/shopping-google-images/
This doesn't always help you get to the bottom of things, but it is a next step to take.
I'd want to assume that their systems are more advanced than that (or if they're really in cahoots, maybe Google crawls them with a unique, secret bot UA to prevent this sort of thing), but I just got done with another thread where an ex-Tumblr dev said all user content was in a single S3 bucket without MFA delete so my gut feeling is lending a bit more weight to the "everything is held together with rubber bands and duct tape and it's only a matter of time before the jig is up" parameter than the "large, powerful companies tend to hire smart people that communicate and design robust systems effectively" one.
That's perhaps the kind of thing google would find quite useful.
It’s less about plagiarism, more about a dead end vs. a stepping stone.
All things being equal, Pinterest should have been penalised into non-existence by now?
How is this legal?
If these sites are offering paid registration, or are including advertising, they may be committing a criminal offence in some regions.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/internet-rages-after...
https://github.com/bijij/ViewImage
Google should get better at cataloging pinterest and stock photos in images, both break the normal rules for websites displaying in traditional search.
A recent googler ama pointed out increased improvements in google images, i hope that includes crushing this nonsense.
Edit: weird, it just adds "-site:pinterest.*" to all of your google searches. Even non-image searches. That's a very heavy handed approach. Uninstalling.
The layouts are different & it’s hard to tell if that impacts whether or not the results are sorted by dimension so they can fit the maximum number of images in the viewport; or if they just have slightly different ranking.
Probably a little of both, but image search results are a little harder to compare between search engines — or harder to compare than “plain” results.
My point is, while it’s completely fair to question Google’s results and doubt what actually producing those results; it’s a lot more scientific to compare their results to at least one of their “competitors.”
Easier said than done, but until there are no comparisons available we should do this (maybe just to produce data so when you search “Which is better Google or ??????” there’s a result).
Top tip: although Bing Images doesn't have an 'Exact Size...' option, I've found that suffixing your query with <X>x<Y> (i.e. '256x256') seems to work.
https://signup.peltmedia.com/en/html/sf/registration/eone.ht... page
Seems like this is like same old free download click here and when you click it says subscribe to download.
However, everything after scrolling three pages down are people faces linking to "Sydex.net People Search"
My guess is "SEO" abuse. Google are always 3 years behind the SEO black hats.
As for ‘spectrum analyzer’ instead of ‘network analyzer’, it's probably Google's wonderful synonym substitution, which considers ‘music’ and ‘noise’ interchangeable, or similarly with ‘Saint Petersburg’ and ‘Moscow.’
I don't recall what I did in the end, possibly DuckDuckGo'd it
I'm genuinely confused why the crawler/analyzer part google doesn't see and blacklists this (Context:I used to work as a search quality rater for google)
Look at: http://3.17.tierarztpraxis-ruffy.de/pna_x_block_diagram.php Short it to: http://3.17.tierarztpraxis-ruffy.de/ (Weblink to admin@gmail.com - haha, funny)
Change it to http://www.tierarztpraxis-ruffy.de/ ... same But: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:DHZ9Sdt...
and this is just "blacklist and forget" stuff: Show one to the "user" and the other to the crawler. Maybe Matt should see this.