Dove trovo pipa da crack?

By -
OK, so PSH's post has me exploring my "stats" feature a bit. One thing I found is that the above phrase, which I think translates as "How do I find a crack pipe?" led someone to my blog.

Explanations?

Comments

  1. Edwin Herdman6:20 PM

    A highly-ranked site (which I'm sure it is safe to assume this is!) having a higher "relevance" or ranking will lead inevitably to it being pushed ahead in a search engine results for topics it only tangentially refers to, and perhaps only piecemeal. People looking for tools to break into protected software or for tools to break into a really large cocaine crystal therefore have some chance of aligning their universe with yours. Fun, eh?

    I remember one time reading somebody's screed against the really awkward and ugly topic (of a salacious nature) that had become linked to their blog. Ironically, by explicitly mentioning the phrase that their blog had been linked to, they only reinforced the association, as well as gave onlookers something to point and hoot at. On the plus side, they had recognized the issue and could have taken steps to eliminate its skewing effect on their statistics.

    Look up "Google Bomb" if you want to see the dynamics of it. It seems oddly suitable for an economics blog to be subject to an economic force of phrases (something like labor competitiveness, maybe, if you take level of "relevance" to a search engine algorithm as the key factor driving excellence to the fore of even rather sub-standard markets, like cracked objets d'art used in the consumption of cocaine).

    Part of me wonders if sending out strange search queries in hopes of prompting the blog owners to treat a topic explicitly is the latest tactic used by the same folks who carpet-bomb old blog comments with nonsensical quasi-stories laced with brand-name pharmas.

    This is why many people prefer not to click directly on a website link from Google - to maintain the element of surprise.

    I hope that's of some use.

    ReplyDelete
  2. PH7:55 PM

    Oddly enough, I've noticed that Google Analytics and Blogger disagree on a lot of things. I think both have to be taken with a grain of salt.

    ReplyDelete
  3. gcallah10:38 PM

    Interesting, Edwin: I hadn't thought of the "Cracked" in my title!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In ancapistan, if you have no property, you have no rights

By -
Ancaps often declare, "All rights are property rights." I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of running into libertarians online who insisted that libertarianism supports "the freedom of movement," and realized that this principle actually entails that people without property have no rights at all, let alone any right to "freedom of movement." Of course, immediately, any ancap readers still left here are going to say, "Wait a second! Everyone owns his own body! And so everyone at least has the right to not have his body interfered with." Well, that is true... except that in ancapistan, one has no right to any place to put that body, except if one owns property, or has the permission of at least one property owner to place that body on her land. So, if one is landless and penniless, one had sure better hope that there are kindly disposed property owners aligned in a corridor from wherever one happens to be to wherever the...
Read more

St. Paul and I Agree...

By -
Taxation is not theft: "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." -- Romans 13 The key idea implicit here, and the one that turned me on the subject of whether or not taxation is theft, is that "every soul" owes obedience to the "governing authorities." Now, if that is a debt I truly owe , then, when those authorities levy the taxes they need to do the job of governing, I owe them those taxes, and attempts to collect them certainly do not constitute acts of theft. And obviously it doesn't matter at all, from this point of view, whether or not I "signed" any sort of "social contract." (In fact, the history of political thought since the Reformation can be read as an attempt to find a secular rep...
Read more

Libertarianism and Violence, II

By -
I decided to move some discussion from this post up to the top level here. Specifically, Watoosh wrote: "Well, if violence is defined as initiation of force (which, of course, presupposes certain property rights), then I think Rockwell is correct..." Well, if we define cats as elephants, then many people keep elephants in their house. More seriously, firstly, violence is not usually defined that way. It's defined as, you know, violence, so that, say, someone may respond violently or non-violently to someone who aggresses against them. Otherwise, it would make no sense to say, for instance, "He punched me, but I did not stoop to violence in response." And, secondly, the libertarian usage of "initiation of force" is very offbeat. If I wander onto someone's meadow, most people would not say I had "initiated force" -- I mean, sure, I used "force" against the earth to push off walking, but that's not force directed against...
Read more