While this is a complex problem

[hasan018542]

Google Search algorithms look for a variety of factors, including keyword density, freshness, and the number of other sites that link to the page. Google also uses artificial intelligence and machine learning to improve its search results. This answer also sounds plausible, except that most SEOs would cringe at the mention of keyword density (underlining added by me), widely considered a myth. It’s entirely possible that this piece of information came from an entirely different source, but without attribution, we can’t validate it.


(machine-generated text doesn’t taiwan business email list use sources in quite the same way a human does, or might use dozens or hundreds of sources), hybrid approaches that reduce the number of sources and provide attribution are possible. Consider this answer from Neeva — an alternative search engine focused on privacy (hat tip to Greg Sterling) — for “Should I get a tall latte or a grande?”: While this functionality is in beta and is obviously not operating at Google scale, Neeva attempts to provide primary sources.



I’ve purposely chosen a ridiculous example because the stakes are low. Imagine a question squarely in what Google’s calls the YMYL (Your Money, Your Life) realm, such as “Is Bitcoin or Dogecoin better?”: This is a question that could seriously impact my financial future, and knowing where the answer is coming from makes a big difference and allows me to dig deeper and either establish trust or reject those sources. Related to trust is a deeper, ethical issue of whether machine-generated text is a form of plagiarism.