AboveTopSecret.com is a Government COINTELPRO Disinformation Operation

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
reply to post by OmniPotential

 

You've made up your mind to accept silly notions. Apparently there's nothing anyone can do to convince you otherwise. Good luck.

LOL....If only OmniPotential knew anything about organic SEO....

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


So you are basically ignoring the parts that explain how the internet map is based on the traffic between sites and focus on one part talking about a semantics connection.

So this is your final verdict? The internet map does not show a relation based on traffic between sites, and the only reason nsa.gov is next to ATS on that map, is because the NSA gets mentioned on ATS from time to time, totally ignoring the fact that the sites of other frequently mentioned organisations do not appear next to ATS?

Is that your standpoint?

You've made up your mind to accept silly notions.

I go by the explanation of how the internet map works, by the people that created it. What I get from it, is that the map arranges sites based on traffic between them.

Sofar, I have not seen this notion refuted in any credible way.

And just to help out a bit with denial of ignorance....

SEO

Organic Search

reply to post by Vasa Croe


Feel free to explain if you think it will better my understanding.

reply to post by Vasa Croe


Please school me, what does a search engine have to do with the way the internet map works, in your humble opinion?

Originally posted by OmniPotential
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

Feel free to explain if you think it will better my understanding.

It is Search Engine Optimization. It can either be organic (naturally occurring) or inorganic (paid). Certain terms that are mentioned on sites and are continually searched with more frequency will garner more relevance in a google search of them. For instance, by your posts on this thread mentioning the NSA that term associated with this thread and this site has garnered more "weight" in a search putting it closer to the top of a search on the subject.

On top of that, it can be delegated to specific areas or regions of the country or even the world for that particular search to pull up more local options for the terms used. Have you noticed that when you google something it returns things that may be more local to you, such as news stories that come up happen to have your news station at the top, or ads on the side happen to be for things you have searched for in the past?

This is all stored in servers that access your search history via your cache and cookies on your own PC that modify what you are viewing to suit your particular interests. If I google exactly what you google I will get different results. The screen shots you are posting are specific to you and your search on your PC.

That help at all?

reply to post by Vasa Croe

That help at all?

No, not at all, because it has nothing to do with the internet map discussion,and it doesn't affect anything else that was said either. If you think it does, please explain how and where.

It is Search Engine Optimization.

You don't say......

HOW IS THIS RELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION.?



lol @ THE STARS.



Oh the intelligence.....

Originally posted by OmniPotential
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

That help at all?

No, not at all, because it has nothing to do with the internet map discussion,and it doesn't affect anything else that was said either. If you think it does, please explain how and where.

It is Search Engine Optimization.

You don't say......

HOW IS THIS RELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION.?



lol @ THE STARS.

Oh the intelligence.....

edit on 5-2-2013 by OmniPotential because: (no reason given)

Actually very relevant when looking at how the Internet Map actually works. It is based on how frequently an individual or bot links from one site to the next. This again goes back to SEO. If you are looking at a page on ATS that has links to NSA or whatever and click on them then that builds the number of links to that site, pulling it's "bubble" closer to ATS. The same works in the reverse. If an individual or a bot written by the NSA is spider searching the web for terrorist or security related key words it will naturally find the ATS popping up at a very high frequency. If said "bot" is programmed to screen scrape or capture the information relating to the key word it is searching for then naturally it has to "click" on the link, again creating more links between sites.

The ATS will naturally come up more frequently in a keyword search for these types of catch phrases relating to conspiracies and major world events. That is why the link between the two exists and, because of the amount of reverse searching done by bots from government datacenters on these particular subjects the ATS begins to be tied to the Internet Map with them.

It all relates to organic SEO....the more it is searched, regardless of whether it is from ATS users or reverse searched from NSA, the more links will appear and the higher the likelihood of the two being associated is.

Pretty simple actually if you truly understood the logic of the tool you are saying links the ATS to the NSA...guessing you don't really understand how their algorithms work....not to mention the fact that they don't have every site in the world on it so you are just taking this stance based on the limited number of sites they have decided to include.

reply to post by Vasa Croe

Pretty simple actually if you truly understood the logic of the tool you are saying links the ATS to the NSA...guessing you don't really understand how their algorithms work....not to mention the fact that they don't have every site in the world on it so you are just taking this stance based on the limited number of sites they have decided to include.Text

So how does this all refute what I have been saying the whole time? You seem to agree that the sites appear next to each other because of the traffic between them, and also that the NSA is actively monitoring this place, to say the least.

Thank you for supporting my viewpoint, and also for the refuting of Sceptic's claim that it is based on semantic similarities, and that they appear next to one and other bcause the NSA gets mentioned here sometimes.

Also, just admit that you initially had taken one of my comments out of context. Admit that you up to this point you had no clue about what I have been talking about in this thread.

Very annoying how you are explaining the internet map to me, when I have been saying that his is how it works the whole time.

Are you going to school SO now?

This again goes back to SEO. If you are looking at a page on ATS that has links to NSA or whatever and click on them then that builds the number of links to that site, pulling it's "bubble" closer to ATS. The same works in the reverse.

I can guarantee you that links to nsa.gov are not posted here very often, let alone clicked, not many authentic users will be switching from here to nas.gov, so that must mean that the traffic is coming from nsa.gov.

reply to post by Vasa Croe

Actually very relevant when looking at how the Internet Map actually works. It is based on how frequently an individual or bot links from one site to the next. This again goes back to SEO. If you are looking at a page on ATS that has links to NSA or whatever and click on them then that builds the number of links to that site, pulling it's "bubble" closer to ATS. The same works in the reverse. If an individual or a bot written by the NSA is spider searching the web for terrorist or security related key words it will naturally find the ATS popping up at a very high frequency. If said "bot" is programmed to screen scrape or capture the information relating to the key word it is searching for then naturally it has to "click" on the link, again creating more links between sites.

One can explain the workings of the internet map without ever having to refer to SEO. The only reason you used it once in your above explanation is to tie it into the subject, to make it look like you were actually on topic earlier, and that it was relevant to the ongoing discussion, which it, like I said right away, wasn't.

reply to post by OmniPotential


I work for the government. I'm reading this thread. For what it's worth. I came to ATS today directly from my agency's intranet home page, just so you can account for the anomaly. I support you, if only because I love my career choice to be so highly and artificially elevated...

Want to buy some excess property?

reply to post by Vasa Croe


So judging from your explanation of the workings of the internet map, I think we can both conclude that these claims made by Skeptic Overlord, who is an internet expert, are not correct.

Clearly you're not grasping the nature of the so-called "Internet map" which identifies its methodology as based on semantics (click the about link). From a semantic point of view, there's much in common with the text on the very-large ATS "bubble" and the much smaller NSA bubble. But even more in common with the much larger (than NSA) bubble of Cancer.org which is also near ATS. Please, get damn grip. It's not about traffic, it's about semantic relationships.

Agreed?

reply to post by OmniPotential


There is no schooling needed as I completely agree with SO on his semantic argument and how the Internet Map works. What you are doing is taking a small amount of knowledge in a particular area of the search engine model and applying it across the board to "prove" your viewpoint.

The Semantic Web is pretty straightforward as well in regards to it's use here and how it applies to SEO and exactly what you are talking about.

I have read your posts and almost all of this thread since it started.

The Semantic Web is actually built for using this exact tool but is not fully based on interlinking like SEO. It has a similar yet subtly different characteristic in that it not only uses content based searches of HTML and XML but also uses a "searchers" interests...naturally those searching ATS and NSA have similar interest as I stated before. There is no other connection between ATS and the NSA...

Semantic Association Put simply Google wants to better map the associations between content so it can deliver what it believes will be a more personalized and effective result.

The nirvana for the engineers working on the project is to map the associations between types of content with an understanding of the intent of the user when typing in a query. So, let’s say I type in ‘what’s the weather today?’

At present Google might know where I am but would find it difficult to associate other content to that query. The reason I’m searching for it may well be because I want to know whether I can BBQ, or complete that landscaping project I’ve been researching online.

Google can improve its results by ‘knowing’ why I’m searching for the weather so it can also throw up food offers or home improvement guides.

It is simply linking because of similarities in content and user interests. This combined with the typical SEO is what most major search engines, including google are doing.

Semantic Web

reply to post by OmniPotential


Dude, comrade, home boy, you've made your point. What you seem to be doing now is wanting everyone to agree with you, which isn't going to happen. Some have explained the connection quite well, you don't believe them, and you've expressed your concerns. What else do you want? I can predict with no knowledge that things can only get a little worse for you here if you keep bringing the same thing to this thread over and over, because everyone who's in a position to explain to you has already done so. I lol at a post of yours on another thread today, so you have a lot to contribute here imnho, so try to stick around, okay. Maybe drop this one and find something else to educate us about, because maybe the learning curve here is that not everyone will agree with you no matter how much you present the same argument which, to you, makes perfect sense. That's how life works, we all live in different "unverses" and then share them with each other, and sometimes you have to - to use a well-worn but accurately descriptive term - agree to disagree.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


it beats going plaid

reply to post by Vasa Croe

It is simply linking because of similarities in content and user interests.

You didn't say this,

Actually very relevant when looking at how the Internet Map actually works. It is based on how frequently an individual or bot links from one site to the next.

This is about traffic....

If you are looking at a page on ATS that has links to NSA or whatever and click on them then that builds the number of links to that site, pulling it's "bubble" closer to ATS.

Traffic....

If an individual or a bot written by the NSA is spider searching the web for terrorist or security related key words it will naturally find the ATS popping up at a very high frequency. If said "bot" is programmed to screen scrape or capture the information relating to the key word it is searching for then naturally it has to "click" on the link, again creating more links between sites.

Traffic.....

because of the amount of reverse searching done by bots from government datacenters on these particular subjects the ATS begins to be tied to the Internet Map with them.

TRAFFIC!


Never mind what you just said yourself, it doesn't line up with what SO said, so it somehow wasn't said now?

reply to post by Aleister

Dude, comrade, home boy, you've made your point. What you seem to be doing now is wanting everyone to agree with you, which isn't going to happen.

I was in a discussion with ATS staff members, I didn't start a discussion with any of you meddlers. You started talking to me, you disagreed with me. You want me to say you guys are right to do you a favor? I don't care about wether you agree with me or not, but if you try to refute my claims, I will respond back.

And don't flatter yourself, you extras mean nothing to me.

Originally posted by OmniPotential
I was in a discussion with ATS staff members, I didn't start a discussion with any of you meddlers. You started talking to me, you disagreed with me. You want me to say you guys are right to do you a favor? I don't care about wether you agree with me or not, but if you try to refute my claims, I will respond back.

That is obvious. Everyone and their uncle and his dog has showed you that you are wrong. You don't want to see it? Don't. Everyone else does. Now you are just wasting time and bandwidth.

reply to post by intrepid


Noone has shown that the way the internet map is claimed to work, is not how it works at all.

In reality, it has only become clearer that it actually is based on the traffic between sites.

I don't see how anyone(honest and intelligent, that is) can still deny this now.

Originally posted by OmniPotential
reply to post by Vasa Croe

 

It is simply linking because of similarities in content and user interests.

You didn't say this,

Actually very relevant when looking at how the Internet Map actually works. It is based on how frequently an individual or bot links from one site to the next.

This is about traffic....

If you are looking at a page on ATS that has links to NSA or whatever and click on them then that builds the number of links to that site, pulling it's "bubble" closer to ATS.

Traffic....

If an individual or a bot written by the NSA is spider searching the web for terrorist or security related key words it will naturally find the ATS popping up at a very high frequency. If said "bot" is programmed to screen scrape or capture the information relating to the key word it is searching for then naturally it has to "click" on the link, again creating more links between sites.

Traffic.....

because of the amount of reverse searching done by bots from government datacenters on these particular subjects the ATS begins to be tied to the Internet Map with them.

TRAFFIC!


Never mind what you just said yourself, it doesn't line up with what SO said, so it somehow wasn't said now?

Don't forget the part where I mention that you are basing your claim on an as yet unverified algorithm based on the creators sole inclusion of websites. This does not pertain the internet as a whole. You are drawing conclusions based on limited data and someone else's actual work, of which there is no documentation of the particular algorithm being used nor any ability to discern if the algorithm actually works as intended. Even in the programmer himself states:

So this is my application. It is written in C# language and uses Microsoft .net platform for Windows. The key feature of the program is performance. Mathematically speaking we have graph layout problem and it has enormous computational complexity for big graphs. Also the algorithm becomes very sensitive on a large scale and it’s very difficult to get proper result.

You can't base fact on an imperfect algorithm, which is clearly alluded to by the programmer himself on his webpage and quoted above.