Web spam

As search engines have become the primary means for finding and accessing information on the web, high rankings in the results for certain queries have become valuable commodities, due to the ability of search engines to focus searchers’ attention. Like other information systems, web search is vulnerable to pollution: “Because the Web environment contains profit seeking ventures, attention getting strategies evolve in response to search engine algorithms” .It is estimated that successful exploitation of such strategies, known as web spam, is a potential $4.5 billion per year business Since most major search engines now rely on some form of PageRank (recursive counting of hyperlinks to a site) to determine search result rankings, a gray market in the creation and trading of hyperlinks has emerged. Participants in this market engage in a variety of practices known as link spamming, link farming, and reciprocal linking.
The economic incentives are similar to those of e-mail spam: it costs very little to spammers to create huge numbers of links, so even a very small conversion rate (percentage of searchers who click on a spam-boosted search result) can be profitable. The costs of web spam are distributed among the search engines, which must spend tremendous amounts of money and labor on developing spam-detecting technologies, and searchers, who must spend attention on determining which search results are valid and which are spam (since the search engines are never 100% successful in keeping spam out of their indexes).
An attempt to change the economics of one kind of web spam is the “nofollow” attribute for hyperlinks, which causes search engines to ignore those links for the purposes of ranking results. The hope is that webmasters and makers of web discussion software will implement systems that automatically add the “nofollow” attribute to all hyperlinks not under a site owner’s direct control. The effect would be to increase the cost of creating spam links, since spammers would only be able to create links on sites they controlled.
. Currently the major search engines do not treat these as web spam, but this is a decision made unilaterally by private companies. There is no opportunity for negotiation over the question of what is an appropriate use of attention expressed through hyper linking. It remains to be seen whether a market-based approach might provide more flexible handling of these gray areas.

Sales lead generation

The realization that the attention focused by search engines was a valuable commodity led to the creation of the paid inclusion model, in which search engines charge advertisers to have hyperlinks to their sites included in search results. The dominant form of paid inclusion is Pay for placement, in which advertisers bid on the rights to have their hyperlinks listed in the results for a given search query. The auction winner then pays the search engine the agreed price per user that follows their hyperlink. With the advent of paid inclusion, profit-seeking web sites could choose to legitimately pay for the attention of searchers, rather than attempting to subvert search algorithms.
The paid inclusion model, as well as more pervasive advertising networks like Yahoo! Publisher Network and Google’s AdSense, work by treating consumer attention as the property of the search engine (in the case of paid inclusion) or the publisher (in the case of advertising networks). This is somewhat different from the anti-spam uses of property rights in attention, which treat an individual’s attention as his or her own property.
The Attentive User Interfaces (AUI) are User Interfaces that manage the user attention. For instance an AUI can manage notification (Horvitz et al. 2003), deciding when to interrupt the user, the kind of warnings, and the level of detail of the messages presented to the user. Attentive User Interfaces, by generating only the relevant information, can in particular be used to display information in a way that increase the effectiveness of the interaction (Huberman & Wu 2008).
The Attentive User Interfaces (AUI) are User Interfaces that manage the user attention. For instance an AUI can manage notification (Horvitz et al. 2003), deciding when to interrupt the user, the kind of warnings, and the level of detail of the messages presented to the user. Attentive User Interfaces, by generating only the relevant information, can in particular be used to display information in a way that increase the effectiveness of the interaction (Huberman & Wu 2008).
According to Vertegaal, there are four main types of Attentive User Interfaces Visual attention
• Turn management
• Interruption decision interfaces
• Visual detail management interfaces