On: In Response to Google

[jeffbee]

It doesn't seem like "lawyer talk" to me. The original article really is "baseless" in that it utterly fails to establish, or even attempt to establish, any factual basis for its claims. Fatally it does not establish the key claim that search quality actually got worse.

[Eisenstein → jeffbee]

> it utterly fails to establish, or even attempt to establish, any factual basis for its claims.

You mean, besides all the directly quoted emails that were presented as evidence in a Federal court case?

[pclmulqdq → jeffbee]

"Search quality got worse" is a widely-held opinion about a subjective measure (quality of search results). It's not a statement of fact at all.

[AlbertCory → jeffbee]

whether or not that's true (and other replies here say it's not): they will always just deny without any specifics.

[jeffbee → AlbertCory]

A person who says they don't have hard data on search quality, but they know it's worse, is not making a serious argument.

[AlbertCory → jeffbee]

The original article had plenty of specificity.