Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Googles job IMHO is to find relevant information, not judge it based on costs. How often do we get second hand news where an article is simply parroting what another site wrote? I'd rather get information as close to the source as possible in most cases. Perhaps that means paying for it, but that choice should be mine to make. Put the most relevant at the top and if people want to read a free second hand ripoff of some news they can select a lower ranked search result.


>Put the most relevant at the top and if people want to read a free second hand ripoff of some news they can select a lower ranked search result.

Couldn't you argue that if the free "ripoff" has the same information and is more easily accessible it should be considered more relevant?


Now how would google find the relevant info (and index it) yet at the same time a 'regular' user would be restricted by the paywall? That might be a solution you can implement technically, but will it also work for your users?

If users don't have access to info because it is restricted to paying users, google won't have access either.


It is technically possible via web cloaking. It is the same technology that tricked GoogleBot think you are a legitimate content site and get served pharma ads for big blue pills.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: