News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We Need Viable Search Engine Competition. Parent comment

Re:We Need Viable Search Engine Competition by nemesisj on Saturday January 04, 2014 @11:49AM (#7011685)
I didn't realise this. Is this really enforceable? One of the tools that Moz sells is their PR proxy, opensiteexplorer. I wonder how they're able to replicate PR without running afoul of this?

Also, is PR really the best, only way to do this? Seems like there are all kinds of better (more modern) signals we could use other than links, which were kind of the only game in town 10ish years ago.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We Need Viable Search Engine Competition by lingben on Saturday January 04, 2014 @02:44PM (#7012554)
Moz uses the original pagerank research paper published before google incorporated. It is the original seed formula which google later modified and now claims it is hardly using.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We Need Viable Search Engine Competition by Aqueous on Saturday January 04, 2014 @11:54AM (#7011708)
Google pays Mozilla hundreds of millions a year to keep its default status in the search bar. Perhaps being able to use PR was part of the deal, or perhaps Mozilla is rich enough to pay royalties to Stanford. Or perhaps Google doesn't mind because Mozilla doesn't seek to directly compete with Google on text search.

Edit: Woops. So none of this is true.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We Need Viable Search Engine Competition by mrnzc on Saturday January 04, 2014 @12:03PM (#7011751)
Moz (formerly: SeoMoz) != Mozilla
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We Need Viable Search Engine Competition by Aqueous on Saturday January 04, 2014 @01:42PM (#7012293)
Woops. Even so Google might not mind because the opensiteexplorer doesn't really compete with its core business.
[ Parent | on HN ]