Search engines, from Google to Yahoo to Microsoft, keep their algorithms secret as to how they interpret the web of text and cross-links on the Internet into relevant results for searches. In part this is because they are a competitive advantage — if Google finds stuff better than Yahoo (to the satisfaction of their visitors), Google gets more visits, and thus more ad revenue. In part this is because in the fight against people trying to game the system for their own financial purposes (spam links, etc.).
But there are those who, with some justification, worry about any black box, unreviewed system. How do we know that Google is actually treating results fairly and not penalizing folks using Internet Explorer? If Yahoo were in bed with the Republican Party, could it tweak things so that liberal sites (define how you will) ranked less highly (and so were read less) than conservative ones? Without review, we have only the promises of the search engines themselves, and the imperfect testing of folks out in the world.
Enter the open source search engine project, Wikia Search, which looks to create open search algorithms for its search results, so that you can see how your search results were arrived at (and either point out flaws or adjust your own behavior, accordingly). It’s an interesting idea. Certainly “search engine optimizers” (“Pay us money and we’ll make your site the Number One on the Web for Grommet Polishing!”) will have more of an insight into how to game things — but those actions, in turn, will then be visible to everyone and subject to open correction. And “security through obscurity” (“If they don’t know our algorithms, we’ll be safe”) is rarely a long-term effective tactic.
I like (and trust) Google a lot — but this sounds like a fine idea for the marketplace of ideas.
(via BoingBoing)
The question becomes, does this open a can of worms for spammers. With Google, Yahoo, or M$ searches, supposedly spammers don’t know what people are searching for or how those searches are calculated. With an open algorithm system, spammers know exactly how those searches are calculated and what and how people search. But as you say, with an open system you have scrutiny to the system which should bring about needed protection.
So what makes us feel safer, the fact we can see if spammers put in their own crap, or having Google and the like tell us they keep spammers out?
I’d rather have more open discussion about what is, or isn’t, working, and let the power of the masses help vie against spammer/SEO operatives than rely on black box efforts from the big search outfits. At the very least, I think it’s worth a competitive try.