I am a small blogger and I don't think Google's next policy about "original content" results in killing "small bloggers". For example, since their change of policy, my audience doubled to ~800 visits per day.
My content is mostly not monetized, I have a few (2 or 3) links that are affiliation links and a page asking for donations. Both bring me no money at all. In total, I have ~400 posts about research on neurodegenerative diseases.
Whilst I sympathise with their position, this seems a bit "who moved my cheese". They admit that through Google they were doing very nicely. The changes Google have made are understandable with better technology and are aimed at giving better search results. They admit that too. That it hurts their business is obviously a problem, but I am not sure (in this case) that it makes Google the bad guy does it?
I agree that breaking up Google is a good idea. Way back in the mists of time, the main way we found out about each other's work was from links in other blogs. It tended to be a virtuous circle, but starting out was haphazard at best. You could get some attention in replies at the bottom of posts, but then the spam came and killed those off.
I think that one way out (with the goal of making conversation independent of google) would be for us to pick up RSS again, and perhaps come up with some RSS specific search engines. Some sort of federated mechanism for ratings and reputation would help.
I am a small blogger and I don't think Google's next policy about "original content" results in killing "small bloggers". For example, since their change of policy, my audience doubled to ~800 visits per day.
My content is mostly not monetized, I have a few (2 or 3) links that are affiliation links and a page asking for donations. Both bring me no money at all. In total, I have ~400 posts about research on neurodegenerative diseases.
My software is a massively rewrite of HTMLy, the code is there: https://github.com/JPLeRouzic/Coralie
Beware it's a buggy software!
justapack is a Wordpress site.
While I try to comply with Google's PageSpeed insights, it's not an obsession, I look at these results once every 3 months or if Google complains.
My site runs on a cheap shared VPN, its PageSpeed performance is 62%, justapack has 50%.
PageSpeed best practice on my site is 96%, on justapack it is 75%
PageSpeed SEO on my site is 100%, on justapack it is 92%
https://pagespeed.web.dev/analysis/https-padiracinnovation-o...
https://pagespeed.web.dev/analysis/https-justapack-com/4b0xw...
Whilst I sympathise with their position, this seems a bit "who moved my cheese". They admit that through Google they were doing very nicely. The changes Google have made are understandable with better technology and are aimed at giving better search results. They admit that too. That it hurts their business is obviously a problem, but I am not sure (in this case) that it makes Google the bad guy does it?
I agree that breaking up Google is a good idea. Way back in the mists of time, the main way we found out about each other's work was from links in other blogs. It tended to be a virtuous circle, but starting out was haphazard at best. You could get some attention in replies at the bottom of posts, but then the spam came and killed those off.
I think that one way out (with the goal of making conversation independent of google) would be for us to pick up RSS again, and perhaps come up with some RSS specific search engines. Some sort of federated mechanism for ratings and reputation would help.