112 replies to this topic

[Alan Perkins]

I wonder what he thinks those ISBNs should link to, if it's so important that they be links. The toolbar is pointing them to Amazon's page for that book. On B&N, the user's already on the page for that book, so the link is pointing to the same page. There's usability for you.

It's better than that. B&N may stock the book and Amazon may not. So you're taken from a useful B&N page to a not very useful Amazon page. It also puts links on Amazon.co.uk pages to Amazon.com pages. So you're taken from a site designed by Amazon to serve your marketplace, to a site not designed by Amazon to serve your marketplace. Not very useful.

If you're on a page for a book on amazon.com, and that page contains the book's ISBN, does the toolbar turn that into a link? If so, where does it point?

Yes it does. It links to the same page, with a different URL. I'm sure Amazon affiliates will appreciate that one.

[EvilSEO]

Should have been links anyway? What? When did Google become Grand Webmaster to the world?

[Randy]

Fine, then I guess we can simply all turn the whole friggin page into one huge same page link to defeat the Google Gods pushing their stuff onto all of us.

Yeah, that'll be great usability.

Perhaps they should stick to designing their own site(s) and allow other webmasters to do the same thing.

I have a bit of a rhetorical question for you to ask Matt if you see him again Jill.

How would he feel about someone having either Yahoo's or MSN's toolbar installed and having those put links onto any search for anything on Google, Froogle or any of their other properties that took their users off to MSN or Yahoo?

That's an exact equivalent in my mind. They would lose their "customers" and also lose Adwords and Adsense revenue.

To take it a step further, how about if I developed a little software application and distributed via spyware and any other means that would grab someone's browser and set up links that look real, but in fact pass through my site to produce click thru income for me via Adsense or any of the rest?

Webmasters should have complete control of their own sites. Period, end of discussion. No matter how Google tries to spin it.

IMO, it's much worse than a slippery slope. It's an open door to a lot of (user and domain) manipulation that easily leads to abuse and evil.

I get the feeling that Google really haven't thought through the possible implications in their haste to release something that the other majors didn't have. Perhaps they should take a step back and give serious thought to the subject first.

[loki]

i'm no tech and i maybe the details on how gg is going to do this technically are scarce, but is there a way for a website to embed a code/script to stop this happening?

[Randy]

i'm no tech and i maybe the details on how gg is going to do this technically are scarce, but is there a way for a website to embed a code/script to stop this happening?

Nope. Not currently.

[qwerty]

There are a few, actually, but I haven't tried them out, so I don't know if they work, and if they do, I don't know if they'll continue to work. With that in mind, I'm only linking to this so you can check it out yourself.

There's a long thread at ThreadWatch that links to 3 or 4 different scripts and discusses them. It's at www.threadwatch.org/node/1562

[Jill]

I've already left the conference, so I won't be talking to Matt any more about this. Although, I could try to email him and see if maybe he'll do an interview with me about it.

I just remembered some other stuff he mentioned when I talked to him. The initial conversation started because he couldn't believe I compared this to Gator. He said that the Google toolbar is installed willingly (as opposed to Gator) and that it's rarely uninstalled (as compared to Gator as well).

So I think he doesn't see this at all like Gator, because people specifically WANT the toolbar.

[qwerty]

Of course, Gator/Claria has always claimed that their software is installed by choice. After all, you have to tick that checkbox to indicate that you've read and agree with everything in the Tolstoy novel that is the EULA of the software theirs is piggybacked on.

But obviously, there is a difference.

This new version of the toolbar isn't being sent to anyone as an automatic update of the toolbar they'd already installed, is it? If that were the case, it would be a very different matter.

[Alan Perkins]

Of course, Gator/Claria has always claimed that their software is installed by choice. After all, you have to tick that checkbox to indicate that you've read and agree with everything in the Tolstoy novel that is the EULA of the software theirs is piggybacked on.

Yep, a good analogy for the "Google cloaks" argument.

[Alan Perkins]

How would he feel about someone having either Yahoo's or MSN's toolbar installed and having those put links onto any search for anything on Google, Froogle or any of their other properties that took their users off to MSN or Yahoo?

Funny thing is, you can do that with the Google toolbar too...

[Renagade Master]

Wow... On the #1 and #2 links in their green url the toolbar has nested the link to an isbn number within another link.

What happens when you lick the isbn number? Also what happens when you click the green link?

[arlen]

Wow, I had no idea. This really burns me big time! Here I'm working my frickin' butt off to merit listing on Google whenever they get around to it, and they then take it upon themselves to steal the traffic that effort delivers?

Randy - It's an easy choice for Google. They can give me a way to opt out of their program. Or pay me for every click that uses AutoLink to leave my site.

Jill - He did also agree that it would probably be a good idea to have an opt-out tag.

Screw that! A clearly defined notice on their site explaining the functions, with a method for webmasters to opt-in would be acceptable, but to assume opt-in by default is just one more spammy technique ... If they expect me to obey their rules for the "opportunity" to maybe, possibly, arbitrarily show up on their search results and struggle to measure up to their current algorithm, then they owe me the respect of setting the rules for use of my webspace. It is my property not theirs - I make the decisions, they don't. They've got people by the as it is, this is simply malicious and greedy.

I don't know anything about Matt Cutts, but if

Jill - "Well that's good, they should have been links anyway!"

is any indication of his core principals, then I have no respect to share. I trust the affidavits on his behest, but this is post rationalization. Any thief can justify their actions to themselves, and this kind of thought only serves to ease their own conscience, it doesn't make it right. It is not his place to determine what is right for my site or my visitors. Probably an offhand comment, but very scary.

[Randy]

Not that it'll do any good because they won't listen anyway most likely, but there's a little Petition that you can sign. Frankly, I don't agree with the petition language. It should be Opt In, not Opt Out.

[Raphael]

I've already left the conference, so I won't be talking to Matt any more about this.  Although, I could try to email him and see if maybe he'll do an interview with me about it.

I just remembered some other stuff he mentioned when I talked to him.  The initial conversation started because he couldn't believe I compared this to Gator.  He said that the Google toolbar is installed willingly (as opposed to Gator) and that it's rarely uninstalled (as compared to Gator as well). 

So I think he doesn't see this at all like Gator, because people specifically WANT the toolbar.

I think he'll find a lot less people willingly install the google toolbar after this.

[arlen]

I think he'll find a lot less people willingly install the google toolbar after this.

Probably not ... if there is any backlash it will come from webmasters, not the general public. Generally, people will install it if they find it useful, and either won't know or won't think thru the implications of the function.