Damn, I tried opening all of Steve Rubel's links in new tabs, and now I'm getting forbidden messages because they think I am spamming them. Grr. |
me too, very frustrating. They do not even let me prove that i am human (with a captcha thingie). |
I think thats trends is a very powerful tool ..!!
|
Hmm, so I guess we shouldn't even attempt screenscraping data from Trends... something like a dictionary search... |
Why screen scrap......just right mouse click and you should be able to save trendgraph as .png format |
I wonder how long until they have a page showing how often people are searching for trends for certaibn terms. And then they could have a trends page for that feature. And so on, repeating infinitely |
Lol, elyk, that is similar to when once I was pondering about how a rate increases by a rate that incrases at a rate that increases........ :) |
/pd, philipp means a screen *scrape* (not screenshot) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_scraping |
Yes, for example in an English dictionary there can be 27,000 words... and that's even a lot for automated queries. |
And since there are no numbers being shown anywhere, it wouldn't be much use screenscraping the data... would it? |
Hmm, you could use something like PHP Image to grab pixel values... you know, perform a search for the, abba the, apostle the, abramah the, abulafia ...
and then calculate the distance between "the" and the bottom line, which should get smaller the more people search for "abba" etc. OK, I guess it wouldn't work because there's only so many pixels in a PNG... |
Correction: "the" would pretty much always be higher, not lower then the graph for the other words. So you'd have to measure the distance between "the" and the other word, I guess... |
But it doesn't sound very feasible! I guess Centuryshare is a better algorithm for that, and it also goes back to any year in history... http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2003_06_11_index.html |