Tag Archive for 'SEO'

Facebook Surveys – Is the Loss of Privacy Worth This Bullshit?

Although I don’t particularly like Facebook, the way it works, the platform in general or the social component of it, I am forced to use it in order to communicate with a few (actually many) people on the internet.

If I am remiss in my updating and reading on Facebook, in a few days time, a person I barely know will come up to me and say, “did you see my link?” If my answer happened to be “No,” I would face immediate social ostracization, loss of network status and a potential removal from said person’s “buddy list.” Actually, Facebook reminds me somewhat of a dreadfully boring RPG in which you are constantly trying to gain experience to obtain a new level that does not exist.


cc licensed flickr photo shared by MrTopf

Facebook dislike aside, this is the platform that two-thirds of the world has decided to utilize for the time being, so I will shut the fuck up.

The “killer app” for the Facebook platform that lead to their market dominance was, ironically enough, the ability to allow third-party developers to create applications for their closed platform. Although this sounds like a bum deal for the developer, they obtain something fantastic from the users that decide to use these applications: Information (for the record, the capital “I” denotes the type from which people can make money).

A Facebook app, when allowed, will allow the developer of the app access to your information, your contacts (so it can spam them), your pictures (I hope they aren’t embarrassing) and other content (that is just a little vague…):

Facebook App Dialog

In a certain sort of way, these applications are like reverse spam; they are titillatingly entitled marketing pilferers that people seek out in order to hand over their personal information. Facebook users are a damned fine source of accurate and up-to-date personal (read marketing) information.

This is an inexcusable digression from my point… People have been giving out their information for free to the wrong people since the creation of the idea of privacy (it was probably short pants, by the way).

My problem with Facebook apps (other than they steal your information) is that almost all of them are comprised of  inane survey questions that lead to an inaccurate/stupid result that has nothing to do with yourself or the essence of your being.

Hey, I love a good survey. Especially surveys with multiple questions that internally test and verify the results for consistency prior to issuing a determination of a category. Unfortunately, Facebook surveys are comprised of the following three components:

The first component is a question. It is usually about your analogical relationship with some characters/symbols/etc. in the mainstream media . I am expecting the questions to eventually become direct advertising questions: (e.g. An ad during which of your favorite TV programs would most likely motivate you to purchase our lipstick?), but they have the slightest semblance of propriety at this time.

The second component is the quiz. This quiz is usually comprised of two to three leading questions that are obviously leaning toward one of the potential answers. It doesn’t really matter whether or not there are any well thought-out questions as any result will be broad and/or inaccurate.  I created a quiz scenario that is not too far from the truth:

Quiz: Are you more like MacGyver or Rambo?

Question #1: Do you like guns? Answer choices: Yes or No

Question #2: If you were to get in a confrontation with someone, are you more likely to work it out using: Answer Choices: Guns or your Brain

Obviously, if you chose that you like guns and would be more likely to get out of a confrontation using a gun, you would be given the result that you were like Rambo. If you chose that you don’t like guns and would use your brain, then you would be told you are more like MacGyver.

If you chose either that you like guns and would use your head or that you dislike guns but would use one in a confrontation, the world may come to an end. Actually, it is more likely that the application would suffer some horrible error as it enters a recursive binary loop from which it could not escape–the world is unlikely to end due to Facebook, even though many in the media may disagree.

The third component of a Facebook survey is the results. Following the completion of the quiz, a Facebook app knows better than to immediately give you your results. That would be far too easy; you are a captive audience at this point with a deep desire to see if you are like one TV program or another. The app uses this mind-muddying anticipation/excitement to ask with whom you would like to share the application. This “sharing,” of course, means that it wants you to send an invitation to others in order to socially motivate them to use their marketing tool.

I took a screenshot of this, and I crossed-out the names and faces while showing how large and clear the “send to friends” option was in comparison to “continue to result:”

After the ten questions in this particular quiz (actually, the questions weren’t so bad, so I feel sorry to have used this app to make my example; nevertheless, I will venture onward), I found out I was like Heroes. If I was not like Heroes or Gossip Girl, I am sure that the only other choices would have been one of the three flavors of CSI, as there are no other shows on TV except these five.

Here is what it would have said if I had received CSI… “You belong in the original CSI: Just like Sin City, you like life hot and covered with bodily fluids to examine. You enjoy rehashing the same plot over-and-over with tiny changes that separate otherwise indistinguishable episodes from one another. In fact, they need another CSI show (#4) in order to have forensic scientists working day and night to determine the differences between episodes on the other CSI series. This fourth member of the CSI franchise is the series that you belong in. It would be set in Cincinnati with an aging cast of WKRP portraying scientists. You might be the guy that is good with computers or the cranky person in charge of data archiving, we haven’t decided yet.”

I would add that app…

After you get your awesome results, you are then given another opportunity to share it with other people in your “FaceStream” (this is a made-up name, but a better app would call your AJAX-y homepage with other people’s info something cool like the “LifeStream” or “River”). I chose not to do this, or spam other people with a quiz I made about myself in which I would be a willing accessory in obtaining their personal details:

At this point, you have received your awesome results and given away your valuable personal data; therefore, the survey is complete. As I don’t want the app to access my information in the future, I removed it while giving it helpful feedback and the score it deserved:

App removal

(1)

Opportunist Google Logo SEO for the New Year (or January 1 tcp/ip in particular)

Since today is the 25th Anniversary of the TCP/IP protocol being adopted by ARPANET, Google has a lovely graphic depicting confetti and an RJ45 cable:

Google New Year!!!

It links to this search query using the words January 1 tcp/ip.

Obviously, that isn’t exciting, there are numerous Google holiday logos, but the fun part is this  DIGG “article” made by an enterprising SEO website creator who capitalized on the scarcity of results for these specific results.

The individuals’ creation? Why a blog all about January 1 tcp/ip of course…  Instant number one Google status for this query (after the DIGG page, of course). I assumed it was for advertisement sake, but I didn’t see any (thanks to Adblock).

Switching to the horror that is IE7, I see that the page is filled with Google Ads, embedded video ads and in-line advertisements. Two words for this person… Fucking Brilliant. I bet they will make a dollar fifty at least off of the traffic from today!

Other people have created similar spam blogs, attempting to use DIGG and these search terms for similar results (working to a lesser extent), but this SEO wizard thought of it first (and best) and is reaping the rewards. Kudos. Even better is that they added some information about the query for those lured into their trap.

I especially enjoy other spammers commenting on the other spam blogs to give each other backlinks (as I am doing for the spammer by linking their page to a much lesser extent).

SEO looks like a fun game.

(0)

Stupid Polls and Embedded Graphics…

If you saw an URL like this one:
http://www.howmanyfiveyearoldscouldyoutakeinafight.com/
how could you not try it?

And what a lovely embedded, linked graphic for your poll results…

30

It even had a nice link for Ultrasonic nursing school. That was some nice sleeper link addition… playing on my love for absurdly long URLs and the eternal question of how many 5-year-olds you could take in a hypothetical fight (I think I could take more BTW) in order to boost your SEO results.

Finding a Person Buried at a Cemetery…

An individual searching for the query “Finding a Person Buried at Oakland Cemetery” came across this website as a possibility for an answer. I find it odd that my site would be high enough to be clicked for a web search on those words… but obviously it is.

Unfortunately for this queryist (this word is said to be misspelled, but, I assure you, it is not), this website did not have the solution to body-finding in cemeteries in Oakland. I am sorry to disappoint.

I am attempting to assist future web-travelers to find the content for which the original queryist was searching if another person were to use the same words. Unfortunately, this help is added after the original search occurred – I have dubbed this Reverse Search Optimization or Post-SEO for short. This assistance is less relevant as the original search was specific and is after I have already failed the first searcher, but I want to help.

Although this site does not have (or need) an explicit explanation, nor do I care to make a detailed entry to cater to the fringe desire to find those that are buried, I will endeavor to outline a methodology to employ to find a person buried in a cemetery in Oakland, or any other city for that matter (except for the cemetery in this picture, which has no names, so you could then just choose the first grave and pretend).

 


each slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds, originally uploaded by Kalense Kid.

 

In order to find a person buried in a cemetery, follow these simple steps:

 

  1. Call your local cemetery and see if they have any records showing the whereabouts of those buried in its premises. If they do, congrats! If not, go to step 2…
  2. Ask people that knew the deceased in life (friends and relatives) if they know where the person in question is buried. It is likely those people are also dead, so you might ask their children or the friends of the children. Oral family histories can be an excellent manner of finding the whereabouts of corpses. If this helps… please thank me with a comment or pass this along to a friend, if this is not a help and/or offends, go to step 3…
  3. If this person is famous or notable in some way, look into books written about the individuals and/or biographers. If the person is famous enough to have Ph.D candidates/recipients that follow their life, you are likely to have found a well-educated stalker of the dead that could direct you to their body (trust me, they will know where it is or have a reasonable estimate). If you are lucky enough to have found an individual to assist with your quest, kudos (just watch your back in the future). If not, you have to move on to step #4, which is a pain in the ass..
  4. You should start step 4 by obtaining a map of the cemetery grounds and/or creating one for yourself. You will need to systematically visit each individual grave and ensure that you have visited and properly accounted for each name. If the cemetery is divided into sections based upon time periods, it may help to create a beginning point based upon the date of the person’s death (you could obtain this date through public records such as death certificates, but I am not going to assist with finding those…). Unfortunately, areas in cemeteries are based far more upon when a burial plot was purchased than when someone is buried, so a systematic sweep will probably be the net result anyways. If the person is in the cemetery, a systematic sweep should find the grave. If not, go to step 5…
  5. If you have not found the grave after the first 4 steps, you are in all likelihood fucked. You should just find a grave without a name or a plot without a headstone and pretend that you found the person for whom you were searching… it isn’t like they will know, and it is always possible that it is the right grave.

I hope that this fabricated-on-the-fly guide was helpful. Good Luck and Godspeed…