Bing Sets The Record Straight

[+dave164 Subscriber¹]

Bing have recently made a blog post about the recent allegations that Google have made about the decision engine copying it's search results.

I was unable to attend the Farsight conference yesterday but watched events unfold online and wanted to take a moment to share some thoughts and make sure everyone is clear about a few things.

It was interesting to watch the level of protest and feigned outrage from Google. One wonders what brought them to a place where they would level these kinds of accusations.

Before we explore that, let me clear up a few things once and for all.

We do not copy results from any of our competitors. Period. Full stop. We have some of the best minds in the world at work on search quality and relevance, and for a competitor to accuse any one of these people of such activity is just insulting.

We do look at anonymous click stream data as one of more than a thousand inputs into our ranking algorithm. We learn from our customers as they traverse the web, a common practice in helping to improve a wide array of online services. We have been clear about this for a couple of years (see Directions on Microsoft report, June 15, 2009).

Google engaged in a ?honeypot? attack to trick Bing. In simple terms, Google?s ?experiment? was rigged to manipulate Bing search results through a type of attack also known as ?click fraud.? That?s right, the same type of attack employed by spammers on the web to trick consumers and produce bogus search results. What does all this cloak and dagger click fraud prove? Nothing anyone in the industry doesn?t already know. As we have said before and again in this post, we use click stream optionally provided by consumers in an anonymous fashion as one of 1,000 signals to try and determine whether a site might make sense to be in our index.

Now let?s move the conversation to what might really be going on behind the scenes.

Bing was launched nearly two years ago to break new ground and help move the search industry in new directions. We have brought a number of things to market that we are very proud of -- our daily home page photos, infinite scroll in image search, great travel and shopping experiences, a new and more useful visual approach to search, and partnerships with key leaders like Facebook and Twitter. If you are keeping tabs, you will notice Google has ?copied? a few of these. Whether they have done it well we leave to customers. But more importantly, we take no issue and are glad we could help move the industry to adopt some good ideas.

At the same time, we have been making steady, quiet progress on core search relevance. In October 2010 we released a series of big, noticeable improvements to Bing?s relevance. So big and noticeable that we are told Google took notice and began to worry. Then a short time later, here come the honeypot attacks. Is the timing purely coincidence? Are industry discussions about search quality to be ignored? Is this simply a response to the fact that some people in the industry are beginning to ask whether Bing is as good or in some cases better than Google on core web relevance?

Clearly that?s a question that will continue in heated debate as long as there is a search industry. Here at Bing we will continue to focus on our customers, and try to provide some great innovation for consumers and the industry.

Yusuf Mehdi, Senior Vice President, Online Services Division

source

[teusje]

and what about wikipedia? :rolleyes:

Looks indeed some PR stunt by google..

(read the blog post: http://teusje.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/google-bing/ to understand)

[Rudy]

I like how they call the honeypot "click fraud" LOL

Stay classy MS you got caught

[XerXis]

I like how they call the honeypot "click fraud" LOL

Stay classy MS you got caught

No, no they didn't get caught :no:

[bjoswald]

Always love to watch Microsoft lie through their teeth to save face. It's almost like theater!

Google wipes the floor with Bing any day of the week. Get over it, MS, and stay out of the consumer market.

[jakem1]

Always love to watch Microsoft lie through their teeth to save face. It's almost like theater!

Google wipes the floor with Bing any day of the week. Get over it, MS, and stay out of the consumer market.

Then why does Google spend so much time copying Bing?

[Mr. Gibs]

Always love to watch Microsoft lie through their teeth to save face. It's almost like theater!

Google wipes the floor with Bing any day of the week. Get over it, MS, and stay out of the consumer market.

Oh you mean how Google constantly lies about not manipulating their search results? Or how they claim that they didn't realize WiFi data was being collected on their cars?

All corporations lie when they can.

[bjoswald]

Then why does Google spend so much time copying Bing?

What the hell could they copy from Bing? NOTHING.

Unless, of course, you're talking about backgrounds or something.

Google's search results are better than Bing. Always have been, always will be. <Snipped>

Edited February 3, 2011 by Anaron

[Mr. Gibs]

Google's search results are better than Bing. Always have been, always will be. <Snipped>

Not for me. For everything I've searched for, both Google and Bing give me similar results. The only reason I use Google is purely out of habit (since well it's been around for the past 13 years or something).

Maybe you need to learn how to use a search engine...Oh but first, please get rid of the word "Educated" from your name.

Edited February 3, 2011 by Anaron

[BajiRav]

I like how they call the honeypot "click fraud" LOL

Stay classy MS you got caught

Umm...20 or so Google engineers consistently clicked a wrong search result - the so called honeypot sites to generate those "signals"*. That is by definition, a type of click fraud. I guess your dislike for anything Microsoft is taking over reason.

*Even then Google's sting only managed to succeed 9% of the time, what does that tell you?

[ViperAFK]

Umm...20 or so Google engineers consistently clicked a wrong search result - the so called honeypot sites. That is by definition, a type of click fraud. I guess your dislike for anything Microsoft is taking over reason.

This. People are blinded by their brand loyalty to google here. Google was in the wrong, get over it people.

[rfirth]

Google's search results are better than Bing.

This isn't about search result quality, so there is no point discussing that here. It's irrelevant.

[BajiRav]

What the hell could they copy from Bing? NOTHING.

Unless, of course, you're talking about backgrounds or something.

Google's search results are better than Bing. Always have been, always will be. <Snipped>

Google just upgraded Marketplace for android that has a feature similar to what Xbox marketplace have had for years now. So yea, Google copies a lot from Microsoft.

Edited February 3, 2011 by Anaron

[jakem1]

What the hell could they copy from Bing? NOTHING.

Background images, sidebars, image search layout... There are loads of things that Google have copied.

As for search results, I switched to Bing a long time ago and haven't missed Google at all. The search results that Bing gives are just as good as Google's and often better.

Seems a shame that Google have to rely on click fraud to trick people like you into thinking that MS copied them ;)

[Frylock86]

Umm...20 or so Google engineers consistently clicked a wrong search result - the so called honeypot sites to generate those "signals"*. That is by definition, a type of click fraud. I guess your dislike for anything Microsoft is taking over reason.

*Even then Google's sting only managed to succeed 9% of the time, what does that tell you?

Perhaps it's just one of those days, but can you explain to me exactly what Google's supposed "click fraud" is?

[Argote]

Perhaps it's just one of those days, but can you explain to me exactly what Google's supposed "click fraud" is?

Simple:

1. Google installs the Bing toolbar (which sends back some information to improve Bing search) on several computers.

2. Google generates fake Google search pages and has people clicking them.

3. Bing toolbar reports on these links and the way users are responding to them back to Bing.

4. Bing's algorithm decides to include similar search results when used with the same queries.

5. Google claims Bing copies its results.

The fact is that the information sent back by the Bing toolbar is EXPLICITLY said to gather data to improve Bing search. If it starts seeing a sudden association with a given link, it "learns" about this and presents it as a result. This same technique is often used by spammers to increase the Google or Bing ranking of their pages.

[rfirth]

Perhaps it's just one of those days, but can you explain to me exactly what Google's supposed "click fraud" is?

20 Google engineers opted in to an anonymous customer feedback program in Bing Bar. The Google engineers then proceeded to search for the honeypot using the nonsense keyword. When the search results appeared, they clicked on the link/honeypot. They did this over and over.

Microsoft was flooded with messages of the form:

"A user searched for saldjkfaldkfalaldkf and eventually clicked on the link ABC.COM"

So, what did Microsoft/Bing do? They figured out (using statistical machine learning algorithms) that for the search saldjkfaldkfalaldkf, users wanted ABC.COM.

It's as simple as that.

[Ironman273]

Perhaps it's just one of those days, but can you explain to me exactly what Google's supposed "click fraud" is?

Click Fraud is when fake clicks are generated usually to increase ad revenue or bring a website to the top of the search results even though they don't deserve it. What Google did was use IE with the Bing Toolbar installed (which Bing says that they purposely use to enhance their search results) to, over a period of months, click on "wrong" results in Google searches. Bing interpreted this as "user searched for this and clicked on that, therefore it must be relevant." It then updated its search results (after the months of clicking) to note this trend. Now the Bing results matched Google's because that's what the Google employees kept clicking.

Edit: Meh, I type slow.

[Frylock86]

Ahhhhhhh. That would blow away this whole situation.

Is there a source for the "20 Google Engineers" though?

[+dave164 Subscriber¹]

20 Google engineers opted in to an anonymous customer feedback program in Bing Bar. The Google engineers then proceeded to search for the honeypot using the nonsense keyword. When the search results appeared, they clicked on the link/honeypot. They did this over and over.

Microsoft was flooded with messages of the form:

"A user searched for saldjkfaldkfalaldkf and eventually clicked on the link ABC.COM"

So, what did Microsoft/Bing do? They figured out (using statistical machine learning algorithms) that for the search saldjkfaldkfalaldkf, users wanted ABC.COM.

It's as simple as that.

Mate I wish I could rep that, actually makes perfect sense.

[Rudy]

Click Fraud is when fake clicks are generated usually to increase ad revenue or bring a website to the top of the search results even though they don't deserve it. What Google did was use IE with the Bing Toolbar installed (which Bing says that they purposely use to enhance their search results) to, over a period of months, click on "wrong" results in Google searches. Bing interpreted this as "user searched for this and clicked on that, therefore it must be relevant." It then updated its search results (after the months of clicking) to note this trend. Now the Bing results matched Google's because that's what the Google employees kept clicking.

Edit: Meh, I type slow.

Which ends up the same, Bing takes the results from Google and uses them :whistle:

[HeroDavies]

Which ends up the same, Bing takes the results from Google and uses them :whistle:

Don't they take them from the customer, not Google?

[Argote]

Which ends up the same, Bing takes the results from Google and uses them :whistle:

The point of the toolbar is that it uses results from WHEREVER and uses them, presumably the humans clicking on the links have filtered the contents and know that is related to what they are searching for...

Is there a source for the "20 Google Engineers" though?

Here it is: http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/01/google-accuses-bing-of-cheating-piggybacking-off-its-search-r/

[Rudy]

The point of the toolbar is that it uses results from WHEREVER and uses them, presumably the humans clicking on the links have filtered the contents and know that is related to what they are searching for...

You'd be pretty surprised :rolleyes:

The honeypot showed that it can bring completely irrelevant results to the engine (not a good thing) and they showed examples where Google automatically "fixes" spelling errors, sometimes they can be wrong and it would bring irrelevant results to Bing that way too

[Frylock86]

Either way, I'm still using Bing. I distrust Google more and more these past few years. They're about as shady as you can get, and I have a feeling the Trojan Horse will be sprung in the next few years.

Their complete lack of user privacy and their attempt to cover up the WiFi incident has put them at the bottom of the barrel as far as I'm concerned.