Comments on: Google Poisoned Links are Bitter Indeed http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed Internet Safety, Windows Updates, Internet News, and More Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:32:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: phased http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-467053 phased Thu, 17 Apr 2008 21:12:07 +0000 http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-467053 Maybe "activate" all the FBI listed ex-mafia and employ them to "visit" the people who keep pulling all the crap with virusware, malware etc etc. Maybe “activate” all the FBI listed ex-mafia and employ them to “visit” the people who keep pulling all the crap with virusware, malware etc etc.

]]> By: SEO-Alchemist http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-421944 SEO-Alchemist Sun, 30 Mar 2008 04:15:55 +0000 http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-421944 Surely if this is wisesrpead, which it clearly is, then Google are going to have to fitilter such the links out, unless there's another way to detect sauch practices. Also, this hasn't just affected Google's regular results, but those powered by Google's search appliance too! Surely if this is wisesrpead, which it clearly is, then Google are going to have to fitilter such the links out, unless there’s another way to detect sauch practices. Also, this hasn’t just affected Google’s regular results, but those powered by Google’s search appliance too!

]]> By: Grumpy Old Man http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-402678 Grumpy Old Man Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:59:00 +0000 http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-402678 To the comment posted by S. Phibber McGee: Yours is an interesting idea, but there could be a legal reason why such a construct would be perfectly ok. What should Google do in these situations? Even maintaining a blacklist of IP numbers is non-trivial. To the comment posted by S. Phibber McGee:

Yours is an interesting idea, but there could be a legal reason why such a construct would be perfectly ok. What should Google do in these situations? Even maintaining a blacklist of IP numbers is non-trivial.

]]> By: S. Phibber McGee http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-401002 S. Phibber McGee Tue, 18 Mar 2008 18:00:32 +0000 http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-401002 Seems to me the answer is simple, Google just filters out all search return results with the tell tale "“IFRAME SRC=//” followed by an IP address" in them! Better safe and slightly inconvienced than sorry. Seems to me the answer is simple, Google just filters out all search return results with the tell tale ““IFRAME SRC=//” followed by an IP address” in them! Better safe and slightly inconvienced than sorry.

]]> By: Frank Fleischer http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-399423 Frank Fleischer Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:30:04 +0000 http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/google-poisoned-links-are-bitter-indeed#comment-399423 Perhaps some enterprising techie could come up with a utility (widget, gadget, add-in, plug-in, or whatever) that would automatically warn the user that such a string is in the search results. Perhaps some enterprising techie could come up with a utility (widget, gadget, add-in, plug-in, or whatever) that would automatically warn the user that such a string is in the search results.

]]>