So the descriptive domainname is probably only to influence Google's ranking methodology? The domainname itself being a factor in the inferred "relevancy" of the content.
Your explanation of this scam shows some of the flaws in relying on Google's methodology and ranking system to (re)"organize the world's information".
Imagine if the world's libraries worked this way.
The flaws should not simply be opportunity for scammers, they should be a signal to entrepreneurial innovators.
In the same way that the flaws in first generation search engines like AltaVista (e.g., blurring of the line between commercial and non-commercial content in search results) were a signal to the entrepreneurs who created Google.
Your explanation of this scam shows some of the flaws in relying on Google's methodology and ranking system to (re)"organize the world's information".
Imagine if the world's libraries worked this way.
The flaws should not simply be opportunity for scammers, they should be a signal to entrepreneurial innovators.
In the same way that the flaws in first generation search engines like AltaVista (e.g., blurring of the line between commercial and non-commercial content in search results) were a signal to the entrepreneurs who created Google.