Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted Online

Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by jsnell on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @01:33PM (#37678126)

> The critical thing that appears to have happened is that a feature was rolled back because it hurt search queries.

Where are you getting there being a rollback? The earliest emails in the thread say there won't be a rollback, and the newest email asks for that decision to be reconsidered. Nowhere does it say that a rollback actually happened.

(The reddit thread isn't about a rollback, it's about an ablation experiment on a small % of users.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by jcranmer on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @03:21PM (#37679869)

As I read it, the ablation experiment is the experiment seeing what would happen if they rolled back, rolled out on a small % of users.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by jsnell on Thursday September 28, 2023 @11:16AM (#37690806)

Sure, but that's not a rollback. That's just figuring out whether a rollout / which rollout caused a revenue drop. (It's basically as if they'd not done a 100% rollout in the first place, but kept a 1% holdout group. The point isn't to get more revenue from that 1%, it's to be able to measure long-term impact from the original change.)

[ Parent | on HN ]