I don't believe in hats anyway

I think calling Rand a blackhat is just as much of a stretch as redefining relationship building to be equal to taking kickbacks - it's BS.

As far as I'm concerned, there ARE no hats - only business ethics. And those, my clients and I determine... not Google.

Painful to read

Joe, at least you were in the right venue to view that kind of crap.  I don't know Jeremy personally. He may be a great guy and a fantastic marketer. But one area where he certainly falls short, in my opinion, is in his ability to select writers. Aside from the points offered in that post, the number of grammatical errors in the content caused me to read it with an imagined Indian accent.

Then there's that whole head up the arse bit... hard to get past that. In fact, I couldn't bring myself to even finish reading it. Could I suggest you keep a six month old copy of Nat'l. Enquirer in your bathroom? Just for when you need to kick up the quality of your content intake a notch?

I disagree with a small part...

of your response, Barry.

"Google is trying to make Google Plus into a social medium."

I don't believe it was ever intended to be a social media platform... I think it is, and always was intended to be nothing more than an information-gathering platform.

Lift that bale... build that graph!

perhaps today...

but if/when/to-a-greater-degree they phase in agent rank, so that authority is conveyed between entities, that will be nearly impossible to game, unlike links. I agree that links will never disappear, I just think they'll have a decreasing (perhaps even zero) impact as a ranking factor. As a signal, they'll surely still exist.

perhaps today...

but if/when/to-a-greater-degree they phase in agent rank, so that authority is conveyed between entities, that will be nearly impossible to game, unlike links. I agree that links will never disappear, I just think they'll have a decreasing (perhaps even zero) impact as a ranking factor. As a signal, they'll surely still exist.

perhaps today...

but if/when/to-a-greater-degree they phase in agent rank, so that authority is conveyed between entities, that will be nearly impossible to game, unlike links. I agree that links will never disappear, I just think they'll have a decreasing (perhaps even zero) impact as a ranking factor. As a signal, they'll surely still exist.

Is it inevitable?

I agree, Jaan, it's been the direction for some time, by design.

Google has clearly stated their intent to be an "answer engine", and if they can peddle ads to companies that aspire to be the answer, I think we can bet they'll continue on that path.

With billions of dollars being spent to be in the top 3-5 results, I think it's safe to assume that even more would be spent to be the only result. And as Siri-type interfaces continue to develop for mobiles (and eventually all systems), the only result that will really matter will be the one that's stated. The KG is key to that, and from my viewpoint, fleshing it out was the only real reason behind G+. It's not a social platform, it's a data harvester.

Ted was definitely an icon,

Ted was definitely an icon, although I'm sure he'd have pooh-poohed the idea. The help he so freely offered to anyone that needed it will be missed, but losing him is what really leaves a hole. 

Ted was definitely an icon,

Ted was definitely an icon, although I'm sure he'd have pooh-poohed the idea. The help he so freely offered to anyone that needed it will be missed, but losing him is what really leaves a hole. 

Ted was definitely an icon,

Ted was definitely an icon, although I'm sure he'd have pooh-poohed the idea. The help he so freely offered to anyone that needed it will be missed, but losing him is what really leaves a hole.