By theGypsy | February 24, 2010
Hiya kids… today we’re talking some bullshit of the highest order; a situation that almost epitomizes the misinformation that hounds the SEO world. This one is a long standing oddity that I’ve personally gone off on in the past. (most recently here)
To make a long and redundant story short (I shit you not, more here) this whole thing began when Google purchased a company called Applied Semantics. This company was stated at the time to be of interest to Google for their new ad matching technology dubbed ‘AdSense’.
Yup, that’s right. Does that sound familiar to you Mr. LSI SEO dumbnuts? Ad-Sense… say it faster… AdSense. But oh no… some nearly 6 years later and there are still those that missed it. There is still crap hat SEO services and chatter on forums of the mystical LSI and Google.
Just to get it home… from the press release;
They spoke of their interest in, “Applied Semantics’ AdSense product that enables web publishers to understand the key themes on web pages to deliver highly relevant and targeted advertisements.”
Get that? It was for AdSense that LSI was originally incorporated jack ass.
I can hear the nay-sayers now
“But it could have been used for the organic search”
No no no no. STFU and sit back down skippy. How do you explain Anna Patterson and Phrase Based IR purchase less than a year later? Those were some pretty interesting semantic analysis methods (often confused with LSI)… Weren’t the Google engineers marvelling at PLSA, HTMM and even LDA over on the Google research blog a year or so back?
Confused? More here at your leisure;
- Phrase based indexing and retrieval methods
- Probabilistic latent semantic analysis
- Latent Dirichlet allocation
- Hidden Topic Markov Models
Then you might want to read this Google Research post from 2007…just for shits and giggles.
So? What about those? Can someone selling this fucking Google LSI bullshit please drop by and share the data with me that points to the assertion yer making? On second thought, forget it. Just stop using the term Latent Semantic Indexing/Analysis and we’ll all be better for it
Say it along with me; Semantic Analysis
What SHOULD SEOs refer to it as? No idea man… if I was that smart I’d work at Google not wallowing here in misery. Just start saying that, “Google uses semantic analysis”. What flavour? We don’t know… but at least we’re not bullshitting people right?
At the end of the day people seemed to have gotten lost somewhere between 2003 and 2006 when the ‘Google LSI’ crap really picked up speed. It went from being the incarnation of AdSense to being the semantic tool of choice in the regular index/SERPs. Even the history doesn’t agree with that (shit, even the phrase based stuff and hiring on Anna Patterson was shortly after).
And there lies much of the problem, SEOs not only having a low level of information retrieval knowledge, but not understanding search history either.
The next time some dumbass SEO starts talking about LSI, please, I implore you, send them to this post. Or hey, just shake them about some and tell them to stop making the rest of us look like a bunch of ignorant snake oil shit heads.
Crap worth nuking!!
How Does Google Use Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI)? – Sounds pretty says nothing…
What Is Google LSI - References Anna Pattersons PaIR patents as LSI… duh
Google Debunks LSI – Then Shows You How To Do It - Understands it doesn’t scale well, but still cashes in on the term
Warning – “Advanced” SEO Technique DOES NOT WORK – Talks about LSI but uses the Anna Patterson patents as the example; FAIL
Is LSI Dead? - Clueless… doesn’t get it.
The Google LSI Handbook – what can I say… WOW… assholes.
…there’s lot’s more…but I can’t stomach it…. ugh…