Assume v. Presume

The order of the items returned from the Google search has changed over the last few days.
The trouble is that, as I understand it, Google searches change all the time. Even the web activity you do in a half hour between doing two searches could affect how it handles the second one because it alters your profile a bit. (Yeah, scary :ninja: )
 
My profile is permanently off, I hope, as I opted out of Google+. But how do you know the above? Any web pages explaining this? I am interested. I have ad targeting off.
 
My profile is permanently off, I hope, as I opted out of Google+. But how do you know the above? Any web pages explaining this? I am interested. I have ad targeting off.
Oh, you have to work harder than that to escape Google's gravity well :)

This is one article I just dug up (I originally heard about it someone ago and don't know where): http://www.wsoaonline.com/does-your-internet-history-effect-google-search-results/
This is probably the most relevant part of the article above:
Personalized search was officially introduced in 2005 to users with Google accounts. In 2009 Google launched the feature to everyone who used their search engine, including those not signed in with Google accounts.

According to Google, personalized search gives them the ability to customize search results based on a user’s previous 180 days of search history, which is linked to an anonymous cookie in your browser. This is how Google personalizes results when you’re not signed in under a Google account. When you’re signed in, Google stores your Google web history and search is personalized even more.
 
Last edited:
Well, it turns out I already turned off web activity tracking at the same time, so Google just store my contacts, calendar, bookmarks, which I want. They claim incognito mode turns everything off.
 
Well, it turns out I already turned off web activity tracking at the same time, so Google just store my contacts, calendar, bookmarks, which I want. They claim incognito mode turns everything off.
... except "Although you can turn off personalized search, Google can still personalize searches based on your geographic location and other factors." (My emboldening)
If you really have managed to turn off all the personalisation then the difference in your search results is probably just down to the evolution of web content and tweaks to Google algorithms. I'm sure G wouldn't resort to computer fingerprinting to keep track of you. And even if they do would they be stupid enough to effectively admit to it by using it to influence your search results?
 
Yes, I have location tracking off already. Sometimes I think it would be better to abandon Chrome and just use Lastpass for my bookmarks. But then my internet security on tells me it only works with Chrome. Firefox is a memory hog, especially as I often have many tabs open.
 
I think you'd have to abandon Google; using Google search on another browser will presumably be much the same.
Personally I'm not that bothered. I do try to disable the targeted advertising because it's just sh1t - it keeps showing ads for stuff I already bought - and I use an ad blocker where I can, but otherwise I just resist advertising as I'm not much of a shopper at the best (worst?) of times :) , and having my bookmarks and history synced across devices is useful.

However I don't use browsers to keep password details except for login cookies for websites like this. In fact I don't even trust online vaults, I use keepass and sync it to my various devices by a separate system.
 
I'm using Chrome but not logged in to a Google account and DNT is set. I recently searched on ebay for some screw terminal connectors and now I see this advert on here. I know people who are fairly paranoid about this type of thing and disable javascript everywhere but I'm generally not too bothered. Google Adsense obviously knows what I searched for on eBay though...

upload_2017-2-23_12-6-52.png
 
Doesn't bother me either. I just ignore any adverts that get through the blocker. Assuming everything is anonymised the way they say it is, as I'm not a terrorist I really don't care.

I subscribe to the "if you haven't got something to hide" school of thought - and although there are things I wouldn't want some of my personal contacts to know, I feel safe enough that they don't have sufficient clout to find them out from my Internet footprint.
 
Ads consume your meagre bandwidth. Best get rid of them totally.

That tracking thing, af123, I found out what it was recently. Hold down your finger or mouse or right click it and note the site, then search for block + that site.
 
I subscribe to the "if you haven't got something to hide" school of thought - and although there are things I wouldn't want some of my personal contacts to know, I feel safe enough that they don't have sufficient clout to find them out from my Internet footprint.
So you have got something to hide? And something to fear?:D
 
Ads consume your meagre bandwidth. Best get rid of them totally.

That tracking thing, af123, I found out what it was recently. Hold down your finger or mouse or right click it and note the site, then search for block + that site.
I'm quite happy to see the ads on some sites as long as they don't get in the way. They sometimes show interesting stuff.
I was just surprised to see the direct link back to something I searched for on a different site earlier in the day.
 
Yes, I forget what site it was but it prided itself on this ability.

Just navigate away from here, then return here to see relevant adverts.

3rd party cookie?
 
What? If you are thinking of blackmail, let me tell you I don't give in easily!
You have 10 hours, starting from now...:p

Seriously, though, that is why I am out of Google+. I don't want all and sundry reading my posts online, whether supportive or ascerbic. My main email displays my full name in Google+, give us some privacy, please! Not many here on this forum display their full name, that bloke from Sheffield who retired to Redditch excepted. (I moved in the opposite direction!)
 
Why do people use the term 'One pence'. Often heard on the various news programmes that should know better, rather than 'Made In Essex' or 'Geordie Shore'.
Pence is the plural of a unit of currency, the penny, so one pence must be the same as penny cubed which also = one penny. Are they bleeding ignorant or what other reason could be put forward? It's about time the BBC news team et. al. stamped on this blatant misuse of English before the sloppiness ends up in general use. Even Wikithing gets it wrong as they refer to 'old penny sterling'. There was no such currency unit, it was a penny. Some one decided that for a short while the in value readjusted and newly designed coinage, the penny should be designated 'New Penny' for a few years, but that terminology was dropped years ago but the common error of saying 'one pence', it seems, has not. Have a look at the bloody coin, it says clearly in raised text 'ONE PENNY'
 
I don't hear that any more, and I don't think there's anything one can buy for one new penny anyway. If anything, what I hear these days is "one pee" (which is still wrong: I pee, you pee, one pees ;) ).

Paul Lewis was on Breakfast this morning, talking about the new pound coin due to be introduced at the end of March. Apparently it is 12-sided, and he compared it with the old thruppeny bit, which he said was also 12-sided. Funny, I thought the old thruppeny bit was 13-sided.*

It seems strange to me that the mint has chosen 12-sided. One of the advertised features of the 7-sided 50p and 20p coins is that they still roll (when confined between two guides, like a ball bearing) - and to do that they have to have an odd number of sides.

* I just looked it up - it was 12-sided. I don't know why, 'cos I've been around long enough to have used them (and the farthing), but I didn't know that.
 
Back
Top