<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Top Searches: Based on Everything and Nothing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/</link>
	<description>Startup and Technology News</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: TechCrunch en français &#187; Le Top des recherches Yahoo 2007: Encore et toujours Britney</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1807645</link>
		<dc:creator>TechCrunch en français &#187; Le Top des recherches Yahoo 2007: Encore et toujours Britney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:26:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1807645</guid>
		<description>[...] avaient du clarifier un peu le processus de fabrication de cette liste suite à des protestations .En conclusion ,ils avaient annoncé qu&#8217;ils donnaient plus d&#8217;influence au contenu nouveau plutôt [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] avaient du clarifier un peu le processus de fabrication de cette liste suite à des protestations .En conclusion ,ils avaient annoncé qu&#8217;ils donnaient plus d&#8217;influence au contenu nouveau plutôt [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Announces Fastest Growing Search Terms</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1807642</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Announces Fastest Growing Search Terms</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:26:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1807642</guid>
		<description>[...] top search trends for 2007. Google&#8217;s list traditionally come later in December (here&#8217;s last years list), but today VP of Search and User Experience Marissa Mayer revealed the &#8220;fastest rising U.S. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] top search trends for 2007. Google&#8217;s list traditionally come later in December (here&#8217;s last years list), but today VP of Search and User Experience Marissa Mayer revealed the &#8220;fastest rising U.S. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Announces Fastest Growing Search Terms</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1807643</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Announces Fastest Growing Search Terms</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:26:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1807643</guid>
		<description>[...] top search trends for 2007. Google&#8217;s list traditionally come later in December (here&#8217;s last years list), but today VP of Search and User Experience Marissa Mayer revealed the &#8220;fastest rising U.S. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] top search trends for 2007. Google&#8217;s list traditionally come later in December (here&#8217;s last years list), but today VP of Search and User Experience Marissa Mayer revealed the &#8220;fastest rising U.S. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Voizd &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Google Zeitgeist vs Yahoo Buzz</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1358750</link>
		<dc:creator>Voizd &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Google Zeitgeist vs Yahoo Buzz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 18:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1358750</guid>
		<description>[...] many servers that they have present in various locations. Google’s yearly list of 2006, however, raised a few eyebrows when certain unlikely terms like Bebo made it to the top of the list. Google’s explanation was [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] many servers that they have present in various locations. Google’s yearly list of 2006, however, raised a few eyebrows when certain unlikely terms like Bebo made it to the top of the list. Google’s explanation was [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yasmin koreshi</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1207543</link>
		<dc:creator>yasmin koreshi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Mar 2007 21:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1207543</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;bulk tramadol...&lt;/strong&gt;

prozac and facial edema...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>bulk tramadol&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>prozac and facial edema&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lil Wayne</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1083783</link>
		<dc:creator>Lil Wayne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 20:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-1083783</guid>
		<description>It is amazing how a name such as bebo which had little traffic in 2005 can be the top searched word in 2006!

That should give us all some encouragement!

We may be a nobody one day to standing on top of the world the next day.

Hard work does pay off in the end!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is amazing how a name such as bebo which had little traffic in 2005 can be the top searched word in 2006!</p>
<p>That should give us all some encouragement!</p>
<p>We may be a nobody one day to standing on top of the world the next day.</p>
<p>Hard work does pay off in the end!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-950319</link>
		<dc:creator>Charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 22:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-950319</guid>
		<description>Google really needs help on alot of there methods of search engine placement. You search for something the results show websites that are 2 - 3 years old.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google really needs help on alot of there methods of search engine placement. You search for something the results show websites that are 2 - 3 years old.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dipankar Chakraborty</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-943565</link>
		<dc:creator>Dipankar Chakraborty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:38:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-943565</guid>
		<description>I like the methodology and idology of Google.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the methodology and idology of Google.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-908541</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 17:51:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-908541</guid>
		<description>I am so happy and excited to know that rebelde is in the top I mean. Just to think of that it all started as a Mexican novela (soap opera) and now they are the hottest music group in the world. Every one knows them, not just Mexico.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am so happy and excited to know that rebelde is in the top I mean. Just to think of that it all started as a Mexican novela (soap opera) and now they are the hottest music group in the world. Every one knows them, not just Mexico.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pamela Fox</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-675982</link>
		<dc:creator>Pamela Fox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 02:37:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-675982</guid>
		<description>I agree with the methodology Google used.
I created a daily updated mashup using the ClearForest semantic web services and CNN news feed, with the aim of showing the "product/person/city/country" of the day, etc. I started with absolute daily counts determining the newsmakers of the days, but I always got the same thing - bush, USA, new york, etc.
So then I used same algorithm as Google- computed a daily average for each entity, and saw on each day, which entity had the most number of articles above the average.
Now I get more exciting results, that really reflect what's new &#38; important for the day. &#38;I continued calling them "product/city/country of the days," as they're still a top result for the day, just by a different measure.
I'd say Google had same thought process.
Info on my mashup here- http://imagine-it.org/sblog/index.php?entry=entry061215-190257</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with the methodology Google used.<br />
I created a daily updated mashup using the ClearForest semantic web services and CNN news feed, with the aim of showing the &#8220;product/person/city/country&#8221; of the day, etc. I started with absolute daily counts determining the newsmakers of the days, but I always got the same thing - bush, USA, new york, etc.<br />
So then I used same algorithm as Google- computed a daily average for each entity, and saw on each day, which entity had the most number of articles above the average.<br />
Now I get more exciting results, that really reflect what&#8217;s new &amp; important for the day. &amp;I continued calling them &#8220;product/city/country of the days,&#8221; as they&#8217;re still a top result for the day, just by a different measure.<br />
I&#8217;d say Google had same thought process.<br />
Info on my mashup here- <a href="http://imagine-it.org/sblog/index.php?entry=entry061215-190257" rel="nofollow">http://imagine-it.org/sblog/in.....215-190257</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikhail</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-654557</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikhail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2007 23:38:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-654557</guid>
		<description>Google's hand-chosen list of "most popular queries" reminds me of The New York Times bestseller list: It's interesting, but it isn't a list of bestsellers. The NYT list arbitrarily excludes categories that include most of the books sold in the US (among them the Bible, perenially #1) because they're too middlebrow to interest NYT book editors. My job requires me to spend a lot of time looking at Web search logs for another large search engine, and unless Googlers are somehow unique, I can tell you that their list of "most popular queries" bears almost no resemblance to what users actually enter most frequently in their browsers. It's a carefully pruned and sanitized list designed to make Google look good, not to represent actual user behavior.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google&#8217;s hand-chosen list of &#8220;most popular queries&#8221; reminds me of The New York Times bestseller list: It&#8217;s interesting, but it isn&#8217;t a list of bestsellers. The NYT list arbitrarily excludes categories that include most of the books sold in the US (among them the Bible, perenially #1) because they&#8217;re too middlebrow to interest NYT book editors. My job requires me to spend a lot of time looking at Web search logs for another large search engine, and unless Googlers are somehow unique, I can tell you that their list of &#8220;most popular queries&#8221; bears almost no resemblance to what users actually enter most frequently in their browsers. It&#8217;s a carefully pruned and sanitized list designed to make Google look good, not to represent actual user behavior.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Techcrunch &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Google Woes, cont&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-648347</link>
		<dc:creator>Techcrunch &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Google Woes, cont&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2007 00:35:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-648347</guid>
		<description>[...] Google Notebook: Use the Privacy Option Gmail Disaster: Reports Of Mass Email Deletions Google Top Searches: Based on Everything and Nothing Google’s Orkut Down For 13+ Hours Google’s Tipping Point Another Gmail Problem  Google  Sphere It [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Google Notebook: Use the Privacy Option Gmail Disaster: Reports Of Mass Email Deletions Google Top Searches: Based on Everything and Nothing Google’s Orkut Down For 13+ Hours Google’s Tipping Point Another Gmail Problem  Google  Sphere It [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-647392</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-647392</guid>
		<description>Bebo is also the nickname of a popular young Indian film actress.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bebo is also the nickname of a popular young Indian film actress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Syam Buradagunta</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-640421</link>
		<dc:creator>Syam Buradagunta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 21:22:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-640421</guid>
		<description>what?  you didn't search for 'rebelde' everday in 2006?  

2006 was also the year when I stopped believing that everything that Google made worked and made sense.  Maybe it's time to get back to being a search engine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what?  you didn&#8217;t search for &#8216;rebelde&#8217; everday in 2006?  </p>
<p>2006 was also the year when I stopped believing that everything that Google made worked and made sense.  Maybe it&#8217;s time to get back to being a search engine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-629110</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:54:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-629110</guid>
		<description>Huh. Wonder how high "china censorship" got?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Huh. Wonder how high &#8220;china censorship&#8221; got?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: &#187; Google Monetizing Search At Double Over Two Years Ago &#187; InsideGoogle &#187; part of the Blog News Channel</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-629067</link>
		<dc:creator>&#187; Google Monetizing Search At Double Over Two Years Ago &#187; InsideGoogle &#187; part of the Blog News Channel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-629067</guid>
		<description>[...] Also, TechCrunch posts about Google&#8217;s Zeitgeist, and Google&#8217;s statement explaining the confusion. As they and GigaOm note, Google&#8217;s methodology renders the results meaningless, making Google&#8217;s Zeitgeist quite the opposite of a &#8220;sign of the times&#8221;. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Also, TechCrunch posts about Google&#8217;s Zeitgeist, and Google&#8217;s statement explaining the confusion. As they and GigaOm note, Google&#8217;s methodology renders the results meaningless, making Google&#8217;s Zeitgeist quite the opposite of a &#8220;sign of the times&#8221;. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-621416</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2006 05:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-621416</guid>
		<description>This looks a lot like &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tf-idf" rel="nofollow"&gt;TF-IDF&lt;/a&gt; which is commonly used in data mining to uncover terms that help to best differentiate one "document" from another, which seems to me to be what something like Zeitgeist should be going for.

If you have a collection of documents (or popular search terms for different years), TF-IDF gives you the terms that help to best differentiate one document from the rest.  If something like "bebo" was never searched for before this year and then reasonably high in the top searches this year, TF-IDF would rank it very highly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This looks a lot like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tf-idf" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/en.wikipedia.org');">TF-IDF</a> which is commonly used in data mining to uncover terms that help to best differentiate one &#8220;document&#8221; from another, which seems to me to be what something like Zeitgeist should be going for.</p>
<p>If you have a collection of documents (or popular search terms for different years), TF-IDF gives you the terms that help to best differentiate one document from the rest.  If something like &#8220;bebo&#8221; was never searched for before this year and then reasonably high in the top searches this year, TF-IDF would rank it very highly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Mackey</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-620757</link>
		<dc:creator>David Mackey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2006 01:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-620757</guid>
		<description>I think its still a useful zeitgeist, though I would like to see those static results as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think its still a useful zeitgeist, though I would like to see those static results as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MarkH</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-620430</link>
		<dc:creator>MarkH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 23:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-620430</guid>
		<description>What ever Google says is Gospel, righr. Google knows best what you should for any given search, eh? I get a little feed up when it comes to Google's holier than thou attitude but they are the only real game in town right now. FYI,  building links to my site, a Google pr6, I have been using &lt;a href="http://www.linkmachine.net/trk.php?ID=1646" rel="nofollow"&gt;LinkMachine&lt;/a&gt; and this software has been super in all respects. These comment were made for free but the link to LinkMachine is my affiliate link, cheers - MarkH</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What ever Google says is Gospel, righr. Google knows best what you should for any given search, eh? I get a little feed up when it comes to Google&#8217;s holier than thou attitude but they are the only real game in town right now. FYI,  building links to my site, a Google pr6, I have been using <a href="http://www.linkmachine.net/trk.php?ID=1646" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.linkmachine.net');">LinkMachine</a> and this software has been super in all respects. These comment were made for free but the link to LinkMachine is my affiliate link, cheers - MarkH</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Berkowitz</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-620217</link>
		<dc:creator>David Berkowitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 22:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-620217</guid>
		<description>I've written quite about this on my blog the last few days (it's fun to scoop Technorati on something once in awhile), in case anyone's interested.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve written quite about this on my blog the last few days (it&#8217;s fun to scoop Technorati on something once in awhile), in case anyone&#8217;s interested.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619797</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:36:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619797</guid>
		<description>"top of mind?? Maybe for tweeners or x-ers"

It may not be what you (or I) are searching for, but if we are to believe the Zeitgeist accurate, it is a big chunk of what's happening now (that wasn't last year), and can be an interesting piece of data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;top of mind?? Maybe for tweeners or x-ers&#8221;</p>
<p>It may not be what you (or I) are searching for, but if we are to believe the Zeitgeist accurate, it is a big chunk of what&#8217;s happening now (that wasn&#8217;t last year), and can be an interesting piece of data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CrunchBack</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619775</link>
		<dc:creator>CrunchBack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:29:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619775</guid>
		<description>Meaningless or worse (misinformation?).  Bebo does get a lot of traffic (http://snapshot.compete.com/bebo.com), but top of mind??  Maybe for tweeners or x-ers, but not for my world.  A few geeks deciding the Zeitgeist for the net over Wolfgang Puck food at the Googleplex ain't news!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meaningless or worse (misinformation?).  Bebo does get a lot of traffic (http://snapshot.compete.com/bebo.com), but top of mind??  Maybe for tweeners or x-ers, but not for my world.  A few geeks deciding the Zeitgeist for the net over Wolfgang Puck food at the Googleplex ain&#8217;t news!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Seebach</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619764</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Seebach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:24:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619764</guid>
		<description>This tendency to list what folks are searching for gives me pause. Usually I think, "Who gives a rats ass what others are searching." Occasionally the thought is they have to fill the screen with something. Zoe......I'll stick with the former. 

What do you use a search engine for? Perhaps to find info, data, comparisons?  If the tater needs help in search subjects mebbe it should stick to the couch.

;-) 

-Marty</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This tendency to list what folks are searching for gives me pause. Usually I think, &#8220;Who gives a rats ass what others are searching.&#8221; Occasionally the thought is they have to fill the screen with something. Zoe&#8230;&#8230;I&#8217;ll stick with the former. </p>
<p>What do you use a search engine for? Perhaps to find info, data, comparisons?  If the tater needs help in search subjects mebbe it should stick to the couch.</p>
<p> <img src='http://www.techcrunch.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>-Marty</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie Y</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619585</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie Y</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 18:27:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619585</guid>
		<description>Yeah, to say the list is meaningless goes too far. Rather, it's more just poorly titled since "Top Searches" implies frequency rather than trend. Moreover, it didn't sound so much like Google subjectively picked whatever they fancied for the Top 10, but based it largely on the percentage gains of keywords from the previous year. If you're looking for shady behavior, this isn't it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, to say the list is meaningless goes too far. Rather, it&#8217;s more just poorly titled since &#8220;Top Searches&#8221; implies frequency rather than trend. Moreover, it didn&#8217;t sound so much like Google subjectively picked whatever they fancied for the Top 10, but based it largely on the percentage gains of keywords from the previous year. If you&#8217;re looking for shady behavior, this isn&#8217;t it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Ulevitch</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619483</link>
		<dc:creator>David Ulevitch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 18:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/12/28/google-top-searches-based-on-nothing/#comment-619483</guid>
		<description>So Google's going to buy Bebo so they can have a social networking site that is in english?  Awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So Google&#8217;s going to buy Bebo so they can have a social networking site that is in english?  Awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.092 seconds -->
<!-- Cached page served by WP-Cache -->
