互联网与文化googleblog.blogspot.com
微软必应使用 Google 搜索结果——还矢口否认
Microsoft’s Bing uses Google search results—and denies it
2011 — 2018，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
2011 年 Google 在官方博客指控微软 Bing 通过 Bing 工具栏/IE 收集用户点击和查询数据，借此把 Google 的搜索结果纳入自家结果，并否认此事。Google 用“hiybbprqag”等无意义查询做诱饵实验：先让这些词在 Google 返回特定页面，再通过装有 Bing 工具栏的浏览器访问，随后声称 Bing 也返回了同样结果。微软则否认抄袭。
为什么经久不衰：它把搜索质量竞争、用户数据采集和公关战浓缩成一个著名诱饵实验，至今仍是讨论平台抄袭、数据伦理与竞争边界的经典案例。
HN 评论精选
Bing 可能只是把搜索框查询和后续点击当作信号；Google 自己也大规模收集点击流，且相关不等于因果。
另一种假设：Bing 工具栏可能只是识别显式搜索查询（文本框中输入的字符串，或 q=、query= 参数），以及从这类页面跳转到外部域名的导航。这样它会匹配所有广义“搜索引擎”——商品搜索、同义词库、词典等等；我认为这对通用搜索引擎是合理信号。（顺带说：Google 通过 Analytics 拥有全网站点击流的大规模覆盖，默认选择加入、到处跟踪用户、还能唯一识别用户；Bing 工具栏至少会先询问。）如果是这样，Google 并非被针对，只是第一个从外部发现这一点的人。科学严谨性值得肯定，但公关方式不怎么样。毕竟相关不等于因果。
sdrinf查看英文原文
Here's an alternative hypothesis: the bing toolbar might look for explicit search queries (either strings entered into a textbox, or q=, query= parameters), and navigation from such pages to external domains. This would match all "search engines" in the most relaxed meaning of the term: product search, thesaurus, lexicons, dictionaries, everything; and I'd argue to be a legit signal for a "general search engine" to match. (Legit sidenote: Google has, via the use of Analytics data, a mass coverage of clickstream for the whole web, which are default opt-in, follows you everywhere, and can identify you uniquely. The Bing Toolbar at least asks first.) If this is the case, Google isn't being picked upon; rather, they are merely the first, who figured this out externally. Cookie for the scientific rigor, but no cigar for the way they PRd the story. Correlation, after all, does not equal causation.
实验方法有冗余：直接证明 Bing 收到同一查询即可，诱饵页步骤并不必要。
所以他们……把结果插入到“hiybbprqag”这类奇怪查询的搜索索引里；在 Bing 搜这些查询；看到结果来自 Google。难道不更简单也同样确凿：直接在 Bing 搜 hiybbprqag，然后展示 Google 收到了同一个词的搜索查询？
justinsaccount查看英文原文
So they.. * Inserted results into the search index for odd queries like "hiybbprqag" * Searched Bing for those queries * Saw the result from google Wouldn't it have been easier and just as definitive to just * Search Bing for hiybbprqag * Show that google received a search query for the same thing
Google 自己通过工具栏授权让 Bing 索引访问页面，再指责 Bing 索引诱饵页，逻辑站不住。
如果我没记错，他们确实安装了 Bing 工具栏，并同意开启一个会索引用户访问过的所有网站的功能。然后反过来怪 Bing 索引了他们的诱饵页面，而 Google 自己给了索引许可，这太好笑了。
Grue3查看英文原文
IIRC they literally installed a Bing toolbar and agreed to turn on a feature that indexes all the sites that the user visits. To then blame Bing for indexing their decoy page, when Google themselves gave permission to index it, is absolutely laughable.
这是理性的公关与竞争博弈：Google 该揭露，Bing 只要提升结果就仍会用，双方都没做错。
先把伦理问题放一边，因为我不太在乎；看这件事的可能结果，我认为 Google 指出这一点是明智的。这一串报道把 Google 定位成聪明、科学的搜索引擎，把 Bing 定位成一堆取巧手段。如果我是 Google，我就希望公众这样看这场竞争。但即便这在公关上让 Google 好看，Bing 只要能让搜索结果变好，就仍该用这个技巧。这像是短期方案，但不错，能让结果更有竞争力，同时他们去解决 Google 已经解决的核心问题。Google 该揭穿他们，让世人知道好的搜索科学仍来自哪里；但 Bing 也仍该这么做。双方都在非常理性地玩这个游戏。
andrewljohnson查看英文原文
Setting aside the ethical questions, because I don't really care, when I look at the probable outcomes of this, I think it's wise for Google to point out what's going on here. This string of stories positions Google as the smart, sciency search engine, and Bing as a collection of hacks. This is how I'd want the public to perceive the battle if I were Google. But even though this makes Google look good, PR-wise, Bing should still use this trick, if it makes their search results better. It seems like a short term solution, but a good one to get their results more competitive, while they work on the core problems Google has already solved. Google should call them on it and expose their hackery, so people know where the good search science still comes from, but Bing should still do it. They are both playing the game very rationally. As an aside, I don't buy the arguments of "they shouldn't be mentioning Bing." This isn't like the POTUS running against some no-name congressman - this battle is already well-publicized, via hundreds of millions of dollars of ad buys by Microsoft, so the general public already knows there is a competition between Bing and Google.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
如今电脑上几乎所有操作在感知上都比 1983 年更慢（2017）
Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
2017 年的推文串认为，尽管计算机硬件比 1983 年快得多，日常操作的感知速度却常常更慢：启动、界面响应和网络应用被层层抽象、动画、后台检查与网络依赖拖累。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2017–2020twitter.com网站肥胖危机
The Website Obesity Crisis
Maciej Cegłowski（idlewords）的经典演讲文稿《网站肥胖症危机》，批评现代网页越来越臃肿：动辄数 MB 的 JavaScript、追踪脚本和广告，把本可以轻…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2016–2021idlewords.com编辑精选亚马逊那本标价 23,698,655.93 美元的苍蝇书
Amazon’s $23,698,655.93 book about flies
博文讲的是亚马逊上一本关于果蝇的二手书被标到 23,698,655.93 美元。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022michaeleisen.org浏览器 User-Agent 字符串的历史
History of the browser user-agent string (2008)
2008 年的经典文章用戏谑的“创世纪”口吻，讲述浏览器 User-Agent 字符串如何从简单的标识演变成层层叠加的伪装：浏览器为了绕过按 UA 分发的网站检测，纷纷把自己伪装…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2012–2022webaim.org编辑精选最后的问题——艾萨克·阿西莫夫
The Last Question - Isaac Asimov
阿西莫夫最著名的短篇科幻小说《最后的问题》的在线全文。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2009–2019multivax.com编辑精选