“Could it be gaming of the algorithm? Corporate secrecy paying its toll?”Another issue then arose. Our reader asked: "How does that work and is that how the ODF news search is spammed with anti-ODF material?" Whether there is an automated filtering algorithm or not it probably would be hard to tell (too much secrecy involved), but having tried a few queries in Google News, it's clear that everything "ODF" or "OpenDocument" is 'poisoned'. It's biased beyond repair, in OOXML's favour. Our reader was then wondering how they prioritise and how they tie search words to the articles. "Starting last summer, ODF-related documents stopped appearing in the search results," he said. Could it be gaming of the algorithm? Corporate secrecy paying its toll? On the need to point that stuff out we were told: "It's hard to. Since it takes time and work to collect data and somethings work fine for years. Google's taken two hits. One in 2002 or 2003, I forget, and then another this summer with News." The problem is not just search engines though.
“My girlfriend once tracked down two astroturfers on some other forums. One had given up and decided to spill the beans. ”They have done this for many years, but how much searching can we do on Slashdot with/without a subscription? Is there an API for at least some of the raw data? Probably not. We thought about writing a script to automate a quick check, but I raised the problem that Internet trolls with corporate interests typically use Web proxies, at least based on observations made throughout a miserable experience (I get abused by anonymous people). About that particular issue I said: "I sometimes get so angry that it distracts me. The libel and stuff is actually effective. It makes me emotional. I write less rationally." The response was interesting: "That's their job to do so. PJ at Groklaw gets the treatment as well." I am aware of the E-mail abuse that had her look away and make another address just a short while ago. These issues might be worth further attention in future posts.
"Honest people tend not to [use proxies]. Not that all proxies will be trolls, but that it can be a factor," our reader says. He then throws an interesting example into the pool:
Dear Microsoft,
For years, I have watched and admired you from afar, playing witness to your unshakable dominance of office productivity suites, wept when it seemed the world spoke coldly of Office 2007, and protested with great vehemence against your blisteringly unfair convictions as an evil monopolist. Why does the world misunderstand you? Why does it question your intentions?
I hope that next month, when the International Organization for Standardization reviews the 3,500 technical issues raised regarding your proposed OOXML standard, that beautiful standard it so cruelly rejected last year, justice will prevail and you will go on to succeed in yet another proprietary vendor lock-in.
Deepest affections,
The Burton Group
Ok, so the recent report issued by Burton Group, a research firm specializing network and applications infrastructure technologies, doesn't come right out and profess its love to the Redmond-based software company, but it might as well.
The report reads more like a love letter than a critical study aimed at taking a hard look at whether the Open Document Format realistically stands a chance against Microsoft's everpresent Office Open XML file format. Had it done that, it could've been incredibly interesting.
Instead, the lengthy report, when boiled down, not only disses the long-term relevance of the Open Document Format, but then goes and blames Sun Microsystems for the format's downfall (if and when a downfall is to occur).
By co-incidence, Ziff-Davis (aka ZD-NET) is the company behind something like 50% of what the media has to say about computers, through various tentacles. CNET was the Pepsi to ZD-NET's Coke (or Coke to Pepsi?), but now they merged. But of course this list applies to the bloggage of corporate A-listers, no matter who they work for.
Is Microsoft tinkering with Live Search results?
Is Microsoft filtering out from its Live Search results those it considers “undesirable” for the company?
Comments
twitter
2008-07-24 14:37:52
Over the years, I've tracked and identified a few of the more obvious ones. I recently collected that work into a Slashdot journal article, the url link above. The M$ people give themselves away when they talk about microsoft, so Google searches for the user name and things like "XP", "Vista" "Office" turn up the Steve Barkto pattern. The classic troll also has plenty of venom for Slashdot itself as well as everything related to free software and M$ competitors. It is not as easy to pull the M$ people out of the crowd as you might think because they use hundreds of accounts and many hundreds of others are genuinely deceived by M$'s marketing.
Scripts would be nice for proving sockpuppets. Once again, Google is your friend for dredging up comments by username.
The problem is sustainability. Mistakes and inconveniences push away people who's cooperation you need to build the site. Trolls using TOR and botnets can sign themselves up for an infinite number of user accounts, so elimination of false positives will eventually eliminate all of your legitimate users.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-07-24 16:19:26
If you search this site, you'll find more evidence and analysis of Slashdot. The editorial team is a problem also.
I personally got attacked there in the comments before, even just for having articles of mine in the front page. Those who attacked are Munchkins and stalkers.
The site is, in general, being poisoned.