Kokesh@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoGoogle is losing itlemmy.worldimagemessage-square140fedilinkarrow-up10arrow-down10
arrow-up10arrow-down1imageGoogle is losing itlemmy.worldKokesh@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square140fedilink
minus-squareOtter@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-21 year agoWouldn’t they be? They could measure how likely it is that someone clicks on the generated link/text
minus-squarecredo@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-21 year agoJust because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either.
minus-squareIllNess@infosec.publinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 year agoWhat this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads. This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan.
minus-squareRvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 year ago Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google’s for the former is what got us into this hell hole.
Wouldn’t they be? They could measure how likely it is that someone clicks on the generated link/text
Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either.
What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads.
This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan.
Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google’s for the former is what got us into this hell hole.