miercuri, 26 octombrie 2011

Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics

Japan Builds World’s First Spherical Flying Machine

Posted: 26 Oct 2011 05:29 PM PDT



The world got a first glimpse of the "world's first spherical flying machine" back in June this year, but its maker, Japan's Ministry of Defense, decided it's time to showcase it publicly a few days ago in Tokyo. And as you can see in the video embedded below, their ball drone is pretty awesome.

The drone can stand still in mid-air, fly vertically and horizontally through narrow spaces at up to 60km/h, and (which is very cool) keep on moving when it hits the ground or a wall. Thanks to three gyro sensors in its body, the machine can keep also flying even if it's hit by an obstacle.


Source: DigInfo TV

Celebrities In Fat Suits

Posted: 26 Oct 2011 04:54 PM PDT

From Tom Cruise to Eddie Murphy to Gwyneth Paltrow, these stars have all donned fat suits. Photos of celebrities who used a fat suit for their roles.

'Real Housewives of New Jersey' star Melissa Gorga


Neil Patrick Harris


Gwyneth Paltrow in Shallow Hal


Martin Lawrence in Big Momma's House


Martin Short as Jiminy Glick


Courteney Cox in Friends


Mike Myers as Fat Bastard in Austin Powers


Tyra Banks on The Tyra Banks Show

Source: thedailybeast

The World's Largest Pumpkin, Carved into Zombies by Ray Villafane

Posted: 26 Oct 2011 04:21 PM PDT

The New York Botanical Garden brought on master food sculptor Ray Villafane to carve zombies out of two giant pumpkins, one of which was the world's heaviest pumpkin weighing 1,818.5 pounds.

The record breaking pumpkin features three creepy monsters bursting out of the huge orange shell, covered in pumpkin guts as they claw their way to freedom. He even has bits of the pumpkin suspended in air by long tooth picks as if they are just climbing their way out of it.
















Photo credit: Ivo M. Vermeulen

Video Games of the Past and Present

Posted: 26 Oct 2011 01:59 PM PDT

Most of us remember the good old times, with games back in the day. Even though the graphics were horrible, one could spend hours playing these games. I'm sure we all have great memories of some old games. So anyways, onto the poll, which are your favorites? Do you like old games, or new games better.

Sonic the Hedgehog VS. Sonic Generations


GoldenEye 64 VS. Halo 3


The Legend of Zelda VS. The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword


Metal Slug VS. Battlefield 3


Pole position VS. Gran Turismo 5


Mike Tyson's Punch Out VS. Fight Night Round 3


Mario Brothers VS. Braid


Marble Madness VS. Portal


Contra VS. Metro 2033


Mortal Kombat VS. Soul Caliber 5

Star Trek is Just Around the Corner (infographic)

Posted: 26 Oct 2011 01:51 PM PDT



When Star Trek debuted in the 1960′s it exposed people all around the world to a bright future full of high tech gadgets. 45 Years, 6 different television series and 11 movies later, Star Trek has undoubtedly had a large impact on the world around us, inspiring scientist and inventors to develop the technology that shaped their childhood. Sortable.com has taken a look at some of the technology in Star Trek and how close we are to having that technology in every day life.


Source: sortable

Halloween Light Show 2011

Posted: 25 Oct 2011 09:35 PM PDT



The Huffington Post reported this house everything jack o lanterns constructed out of Christmas lights that will sing and bounce the beat during the entire tune.This house is located in Riverside,Ca and is known by millions for their outstanding,entertaining Halloween light shows, including "Thriller, Sandstorm and "Monster Mash."

According to the mastermind's YouTube channel, the light show includes:
4 singing pumpkin faces, tombstones, hand carved pumpkins, strobes, floods and thousands of lights. Most all lights have been changed from incandescent to RGB LED so power consumption is a lot less than previous years.

Berlin’s Festival of Lights 2011

Posted: 25 Oct 2011 08:47 PM PDT

The seventh annual Festival of Lights took place in Berlin, Germany. Beams of bright colors and shapes illuminate more than 50 famous landmarks and spaces, including Brandenburg Gate, Berlin Cathedral and the radio tower.

From October 12 to October 23, Berlin's Festival of Lights makes for some spectacular sights in the German capital. The longer autumn nights are the best time to put the city in the spotlight. The open-air gallery starts every night at 7pm and lasts until midnight.

The Berlin cathedral is seen as it is illuminated during the Festival of Lights in Berlin on Wednesday.


Source: Fabrizio Bensch / Reuters


Source: Fabrizio Bensch / Reuters


Source: Thomas Peter / Reuters


Source: Jensa Kalaene / EPA


Source: Thomas Peter / Reuters


Source: Reuters / Tobias Schwarz


Source: Reuters / Fabrizio Bensch


Source: Reuters / Thomas Peter


Source: Reuters / Fabrizio Bensch


Source: Reuters / Thomas Peter


Source: Reuters / Tobias Schwarz


Source: Reuters / Fabrizio Bensch


Source: Reuters / Thomas Peter


Source: Reuters / Tobias Schwarz


Source: Reuters / Thomas Peter


Source: Reuters / Thomas Peter

Kiira Korpi - The Most Beautiful Figure Skater in the World

Posted: 25 Oct 2011 04:27 PM PDT

Widely regarded as the most beautiful woman in figure skating, Finland's Kiira Korpi is also among the most talented and she has the results to prove it. She is the 2007 and 2011 European bronze medalist, 2010 Trophée Eric Bompard champion and a two-time Finnish National Champion (2009, 2011). Furthermore, her father, Rauno Korpi, coached the Finnish women's hockey team to the bronze at the 1998 Winter Olympic Games in Nagano.
Publicat de 1 la 19:07 0 comentarii

16 Insights into Google's Rating Guidelines

16 Insights into Google's Rating Guidelines

16 Insights into Google's Rating Guidelines

Posted: 25 Oct 2011 11:33 AM PDT

Posted by Dr. Pete

ChecklistLast week, when the SEO world was distracted by revelations that Google was blocking keyword referral data and nostalgic mania over MC Hammer’s search engine, Search Engine Land released a leaked Google document outlining Google's official guidelines for quality raters. I read the 125-page document out of curiosity, and I decided to share some valuable insights it contains into the mind of Google.

Sorry, No Secrets Here

If you’re looking for SEO “secrets,” you’ll be disappointed by this post. Although this is an internal document, and Google may not be happy about it being leaked, you won’t find a smoking gun here. What you will find is a training manual on Google’s philosophy of quality. The key to proactive SEO is to understand how Google thinks. If you only chase the algorithm, you’ll always be reacting to changes after they happen. Since the document in question is proprietary, I’m not going to link directly to copies of the document or quote large chunks of it. I’m writing this post because I sincerely believe that understanding Google’s philosophy of quality is a fundamentally “white hat” proposition.

What Is A Quality Rater?

Quality raters are Google’s fact checkers – the people who work to make sure the algorithm is doing what it’s supposed to do. Data from quality raters not only serves as quality control on existing SERPs, but it helps validate potential algorithm changes. When you consider that Google tested over 13,000 algorithm changes last year, it’s a pretty important job.

This particular document focuses on rating SERP quality based on specific queries. Essentially, a rater reviews the sites returned by a given query and evaluates each result based on relevance. Raters also flag sites that they consider to be spam. One last note: Google’s philosophy is not always reflected in the algorithm. The algorithm is an attempt to code quality into rules, and that attempt will always be imperfect. The document, for example, says almost nothing about back-link count, unique linking domains, linking C-blocks, etc. Those are all metrics that attempt to quantify relevance.

Here are 16 insights into the human side of Google's quality equation, in no particular order…

(1) Relevance Is A Continuum

I think the biggest revelation of the document, in a broad sense, is that Google’s view of relevance is fairly sophisticated and nuanced. Raters are instructed to rate relevance along a continuum with 5 options: “Vital”, “Useful”, “Relevant”, “Slightly Relevant”, and “Off-topic”. Of course, there is always a certain amount of subjectivity to ratings, but Google provides many examples and detailed guidelines.

(2) Relevance & Spam Are Independent

Relevance is a rating, but spam is a flag. So, in Google’s view, a site can be useful but spammy, or it can be irrelevant but still spam-free. I think we see some of that philosophy in the algorithm. Content is relevant or irrelevant, but spam is about tactics and intent.

(3) The Most Likely Intent Rules

Some queries are ambiguous – “apple”, for example, can mean a lot of things without any context. Google instructs raters to, in most cases, use the dominant interpretation. What’s interesting is that their dominant interpretations often seem to favor big brands. In specific examples, the dominant interpretation of “apple” is Apple Computers and the dominant interpretation of “kayak” is the travel site Kayak.com.

Other interpretations (like “apple” the fruit or “kayak” the mode of transportation) automatically get lower relevance ratings if there’s a dominant interpretation. I think the notion of a dominant interpretation makes some sense, and it may be necessary for a rater to do their job, but it’s also highly subjective. In some cases, I just didn’t agree with Google’s examples, and I felt that the dominant interpretation unfairly penalized legitimate sites. Most people may want to buy an iPad when they type “apple”, but a site that specializes in online organic apple sales is still highly relevant to the ambiguous query, in my opinion.

(4) Some Results Are “Vital”

The “Vital” relevance rating is a special case. Any official entity – a company, an actor/actress, a politician, etc., can have a vital result. In most cases, this is their official home-page. Only a dominant interpretation can be vital – Apple Vacations will never be the vital result for “apple” (sorry, Apple Vacations; I don’t make the rules). I suspect this is a safety valve for checking the algorithm – if “vital” results don’t appear for entity searches, many people would question Google’s results, even if the SEO efforts of those entities don’t measure up.

Social profiles can also be vital, if those profiles are for individuals or small groups. So, a politician, actress or rock band could have multiple “vital” pages (their home-page, their Facebook page, and their Twitter profile, for example). Interestingly, Google specifically instructs that social media profiles for companies cannot be considered vital.

(5) Generic Queries Are Never Vital

Obviously, Walmart.com is a vital result for the query “walmart”, but Couches.com is not a vital result for the query “couches”. An exact-match domain doesn’t automatically make something vital, and some queries are inherently generic.

(6) Queries Come in 3 Flavors

Query intent can be classified, according to Google, as Action (“Do”), Information (“Know”) or Navigation (“Go”). Like ice cream, queries can come in more than one flavor (although Neapolitan ice cream should never substitute banana for vanilla). This Do/Know/Go model comes up a lot in the document and is a pretty useful structure for understanding search in general. Relevance is determined by intent – if a query is clearly action-oriented (e.g. “buy computer”), then only an Action (”Do”) result can be highly relevant.

(7) Useful Goes Beyond Relevance

This is wildly open to interpretation, but Google says that “useful” pages (the top rating below “vital”) should be more than just relevant – they should also be highly satisfying, authoritative, entertaining, and/or recent. This is left to the rater’s discretion, and no site has to meet all of these criteria, but it’s worth nothing that relevance alone isn’t always enough to get the top ratings.

(8) Relevance Implies Language Match

If a search result clearly doesn’t match the target language of the query, then in most cases that result is low-relevance. Likewise, if a query includes or implies a specific country, and the result doesn’t match that country, the result isn’t relevant.

(9) Local Intent Can Be Automatic

Even if a query is generic, it can imply local intent. Google gives the example of “ice rink” – a query for “ice rink” should return local results, and clearly non-local results should be rated as off-topic or useless. This applies whether or not the location is in the query. Again, expect Google to infer intent more and more, and local intent is becoming increasingly important to them.

(10) Landing Page Specificity Matters

A good landing page will fit the specificity of the query. A detailed product page, for example, is a better match to a long-tail query for a specific item. On the other hand, if the query is broad, then a broader resource may be more relevant. For example, if the query is “chicken recipes”, then a page with only one recipe isn’t as relevant as a list of recipes.

(11) Misspellings Are Rated By Intent

If a query is clearly misspelled, the relevance of the results should be based on the user’s most likely intent. In the old days, targeting misspellings was a common SEO practice, but I think we’re seeing more and more that Google will automatically push searchers toward the proper spelling. It’s likely Google is only going to get more aggressive about trying to determine intent and even pushing users toward the dominant intent.

(12) Copied Content Can Be Relevant

This may come as a surprise in a Post-Panda world, but Google officially recognizes that copied content isn’t automatically low quality, as long as it’s well-organized, useful, and isn’t just designed to drive ad views. Again, this is a bit subjective, and it’s clear that you have to add value somehow. A site with nothing but copied content (whether legitimately syndicated or scraped) isn’t going to gain high marks, and a site that’s only using copied content to wrap ads around it is going to be flagged as spam.

(13) Some Queries Don’t Need Defining

Dictionary or encyclopedia pages are only useful if a query generally merits definition or more information. If most users understand the meaning of the query word(s) – Google gives the example of “bank” – then a dictionary or encyclopedia page is not considered useful. Of course, tell that to Wikipedia.

(14) Ads Without Value Are Spam

One quote stood out in the document – “If a page exists only to make money, the page is spam.” Now, some business owners will object, saying that most sites exist to make money, in some form. When Google says “only to make money”, they seem to be saying money-making without content value. It’s ok to make money and have ads on your page, as long as you have content value to back it up. If you’ve just built a portal to collect cash, then you’re a spammer.

(15) Google.com Is Low Relevance

By Google’s standards, an empty search box with no results displayed is off-topic or useless. Ironic, isn’t it? Joking aside, the document does suggest that internal search results pages can be relevant and useful in some cases.

(16) Google Raters Use Firefox

I said no secrets, but I guess this is a little bit of inside information. Google raters are instructed to use Firefox, along with the web developer add-on. Do with that as you will.

Knowing Is 53.9% of The Battle*

So, there you go – 16 insights into the mind of Google. Advanced SEO, in my opinion, really comes down to understanding how Google thinks, and how they translate their values and objectives into code. You can lose a lot of time and money only making changes when you've lost ranking – really understanding the mind of Google is the best way to future-proof your SEO efforts.

*I always wondered what the other half was – blowing stuff up, apparently.


Do you like this post? Yes No

Publicat de 1 la 17:21 0 comentarii
Abonați-vă la: Postări (Atom)