What is Digg?41 Comments
- comittech, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10PageRank is continuously changing... The toolbar only updates every few month... This article is old and riddled with errors!
- TVisdoG, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5(Almost) nobody knows, when to use a comma.
- cledford, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8"Page Rank considers site age"
... news to me - Scyth3, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6The thing is, aside from SEO people, most people don't care. Google works the best because of it, and that's all that matters. I'm sure the algorithm is based on a ton of matrices though.
- djg38, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4While it does a good job dispelling a few big ones, this article is still filled with myths and mistakes. PageRank is not updated every few months; it's updated continuously along with the index, while the snapshot pushed to the toolbar servers (on that logarithmic scale mentioned) is only updated every few months.
Linking to high quality sites is important? No, no it's not.
Why is anchor text repeated 3 times under "which factors do have an impact on PageRank"? Anchor text, while incredibly important to search result rankings, is absolutely irrelevant in PageRank calculations. It's a pure numbers game.
The more I reread this, the more rubbish I find. - dzorz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5PageRank's importance is really overrated. You should read relatively new article in NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/business/yourmoney/03google.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) about Google's ranking algorithm. They state that PageRank is only one of about 200 signals (although it's "weight" is probably higher than others').
- Eddm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Kinda funny how this article itself should be flagged as a link farm and therefore be banned from Google spidering anyway -- according to the point in there about how pages with 100+ outgoing links are penalized.
- bigellow, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I dugg this because, for an article, it is very informative and must have taken a while to piece together. Nonetheless, it puts all of its emphasis on PageRank by itself. Google used a set of MANY algorithms to rank results, with PageRank only being one method of weighting pages. The formula behind PageRank has never been a secret. It was published by Larry Page back when he created it. In fact, it's not named PageRank because it ranks "pages", but because it was authored by Larry "Page". If all you ever do is pay attention to PageRank, you are going to miss the boat.. because, again, there are many algorithms that are taken into consideration when ranking results. New algorithms are added regularly (such as a recent one to thwart "googlebombing". In any case, for an article that takes public information and bring it to the public's attention in a day and age where everyone treats PageRank as a big mystery, it does a good job.
- phenolholic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1i took a linear algebra class and they had a special topic on google and pagerank. google's search engine (and pagerank) is entirely based on matrix algebra. nice to see that underneath it all, mathematics prevails
- djg38, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Appositives are my favorite reason to use a comma.
- bigalreturns, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1“One-way inbound links from websites with topics that are related to your website’s topic will help you gain a higher Page Rank. Other one-way inbound links from pages with high page rank but unrelated topics do help a little, but not nearly as much."
There's another for your collection. - crxvfr, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Righton dadiggcode
Everybodies an SEO these days... Page rank is a smoke screen that blinds only the newbies.
Page rank is only important if you try to sell links on your site. - duffymo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The New York Times article was good. It's a far better description of PageRank than the Digg article.
I like these papers, too:
http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~bryan/googleFinalVersionFixed.pdf
http://meyer.math.ncsu.edu/Meyer/PS_Files/DeeperInsidePR.pdf
Both are far better. - lorainee, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1From the article:
"Update: we’d like to apologize for some misleading facts we’ve initially included in this article. We’ve re-checked the sources and inaccurate or incomplete data. The .pdf-file won’t contain any mistakes. Thanks to all the readers who’ve pointed us to the mistakes (particularly Dan Grossman and Reuben Yau)." - Raian, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1We know it does what the Chinese gov't tells it...
- lensman00, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Here's an old overview, by Brin and Page:
http://infolab.stanford.edu/~backrub/google.html
It describes the recursive citation index (PageRank) and mentions some of the other heavily weighted factors. "In order to accomplish this Google makes heavy use of hypertextual information consisting of link structure and link (anchor) text. Google also uses proximity and font information."
interesting: scroll about 2/3 of the way down for the original 'ugly' results presentation including relevancy meters. This presentation got trashed on the comp.infosystems.search newsgroup as poor usability and was revised soon thereafter. - xaeon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I've always thought of PageRank as a bit of a silly way of ranking relevance. It's a web-based popularity contest. The cool kids aren't always the best kids.
- cqkid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1A bloody excellent and informative essay for casual browsers and for those who really want to take some time and get to the heart of the PageRank matter. I've quoted from it (with references) in an article I've just written for cqextra.com.au. it's a bit of dumbed-down article.
- DaDiggCode, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3@ crxvfr
...funny how we know what we're talking about YET WE ARE STILL getting digg'd down on our comments... Hummm makes me wonder who's digg'ing this article. - BaByB0y, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I've used search status extension in Firefox to check Google pagerank and many more :)
nXqd - crxvfr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@dadiggcode
"YET WE ARE STILL getting digg'd down on our comments"
That's OK. They can't dig down our SERPS. :)
In three years I managed to move my employers site from buried to #1 for several competitive phrases. Their web rev increased thirty times over. Our SERPS outrank many sites with higher page rank. There are many components to consider when ranking a site, and in my experience, as you said, page rank is one of the last things I consider, if it gets any time at all. Sure, it doesn't hurt to have high page rank, but the income coming in pacifies me. :) So long as the rank and traffic is there, I won't worry the page rank. Its poorly maintained by Google and can only serve to be a very vague indicator, over the course of time. - Derrekito, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1FTA: Everybody is using it, but (almost) nobody really knows, how it works.
That second comma is not needed...
/annoyed - R0CKY, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1It's old news.
- Aces, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Mathematics is underneath everything, not just google or pagerank. All of computer science is math.
- nikkesen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I have a domain and I'm impressed that I even have a page rank so, I think it's great! Anything to make your site more widely accessible through search engines is a good thing when you've got something to share.
- haggie, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2"most important algorithm ever developed for the web"
Marked as moronic hyperbole. - djg38, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1My site is PR7. http://www.w3counter.com
We know plenty about the algorithms. Read Google's patents. They're public material. - DaDiggCode, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2As a SEO guru, I'd say that Pagerank is one of the last things you should worry about when marketing your site. Also Pagerank Toolbar is usually about 1-2 months behind what Google acutally assigns to your website.
- pumpedvideo, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3Buried as SEO SPAM
- HyperJack, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Al I know is that its a little bar in the Google Toolbar which fills up to different levels of green when I visit a site.
Never knew how it really works, - Rekzai, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1My site is PR4 :D
- iuchewie, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0KillTheCan.org is a PR of 4 as well...
Amazing how many articles are written about Google's algorithm yet we really don't know much about how it works...
chewie
http://www.killthecan.org/ - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2I like how Google's own homepage is only PR8
- Chompy, on 10/11/2007, -14/+9Some people also, don't know, how commas work. Find more from here ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_%28punctuation%29 - lkmbrd, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4Your mom's a PageRank 10.
- grrreat, on 10/11/2007, -14/+8wow... thats a very concise write up... smashing!
- HyperJack, on 10/11/2007, -9/+1Your Digg rating for that comment is now at a minus. Have a nice day ;-)
- dev65, on 10/11/2007, -17/+4PageRank sucks
- Scyth3, on 10/11/2007, -15/+2Grrreat's response was the best knee-slapper of the day. Pure comic gold.
No seriously...it's the Grrreat'est comment you might say.
....yeah, go kill yourself.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is