What's a good free Windows video editor that crops out data in the MP4 video frame?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| the top in allegedly non-paid results. Yet I specifically
| asked about buying plastic in Boston, not online.)
|
| How did you specifically specify that?

"buy lexan Boston"

That doesn't rule out online options, but don't you
think stores near Boston that sell Lexan should have
been listed before a website that takes orders online?
Why would I add "Boston" if I wanted to buy online?
(Note that eplastics.com also bought an ad on that page
where their link showed neaer the top.)

In article , Mayayana
wrote:


| the top in allegedly non-paid results. Yet I specifically
| asked about buying plastic in Boston, not online.)
|
| How did you specifically specify that?

"buy lexan Boston"

That doesn't rule out online options, but don't you
think stores near Boston that sell Lexan should have
been listed before a website that takes orders online?
Why would I add "Boston" if I wanted to buy online?
(Note that eplastics.com also bought an ad on that page
where their link showed neaer the top.)

i didn't see eplastics at all when i do a search for lexan in boston
using google, ad or otherwise.

what i see on the very first page of results is:

in the map:
- altec plastics in south boston
- fields corner glass and lexan in (you guessed it), fields corner

in the listings:
- jfreeman in dorchester
- polycarbonate plastics in worcester (covering all of new england)
- hart supply in hingham

2nd page of results:
- altec plastics in south boston (normal listing, not on a map)
- karas glass in south boston

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| the top in allegedly non-paid results. Yet I specifically
| asked about buying plastic in Boston, not online.)
|
| How did you specifically specify that?

Another way of looking at that: I searched for 3
words specifically to narrow the returns. I wanted to
buy Lexan somewhere near Boston. The word
"Boston" does not appear anywhere in the page
or code of eplastics.com. Yet their homepage came
up at #17. The company I bought from, J. Freeman,
didn't come up on that page, or the next, or the
next. But I did get Staples.com, art.com, the official
Boston Bruins logo gear store and tropicalfishstore.com,
which has acrylic tanks. (Lexan tanks, too? I doubt
it. Lexan scratches easily. So tropicalfishstore.com
must have been sort of free association debris, along
with many of the other listings.)

Interestingly, eplastics also came up at #5 for a
search engine scamming page they've posted that
merely contains a long list of locations:

http://www.eplastics.com/Where-to-buy-Plexiglass

So DDG was putting big commercial sites first even
when they're not relevant. They're also falling for
scam SEO pages.

As it turned out, I only found the J. Freeman site
because they had listed at
http://www.macraesbluebook.com/pages/about.cfm

So an advertising site had the info I needed. If
J. Freeman hadn't bought an ad at MacRae's I might
never have found them.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| the top in allegedly non-paid results. Yet I specifically
| asked about buying plastic in Boston, not online.)
|
| How did you specifically specify that?

Another way of looking at that: I searched for 3
words specifically to narrow the returns. I wanted to
buy Lexan somewhere near Boston. The word
"Boston" does not appear anywhere in the page
or code of eplastics.com. Yet their homepage came
up at #17. The company I bought from, J. Freeman,
didn't come up on that page, or the next, or the
next. But I did get Staples.com, art.com, the official
Boston Bruins logo gear store and tropicalfishstore.com,
which has acrylic tanks. (Lexan tanks, too? I doubt
it. Lexan scratches easily. So tropicalfishstore.com
must have been sort of free association debris, along
with many of the other listings.)

wtf?

jfreeman was *second* in the list when i did the search, along with
several other boston area suppliers (see other post for the list) on
the first page and a couple more on the second.

Interestingly, eplastics also came up at #5 for a

i didn't see eplastics at all.

....

So an advertising site had the info I needed. If
J. Freeman hadn't bought an ad at MacRae's I might
never have found them.

or if you knew how to use google.

"nospam" wrote

| i didn't see eplastics at all when i do a search for lexan in boston
| using google, ad or otherwise.
|
| what i see on the very first page of results is:
|
| in the map:
| - altec plastics in south boston
| - fields corner glass and lexan in (you guessed it), fields corner
|
| in the listings:
| - jfreeman in dorchester
| - polycarbonate plastics in worcester (covering all of new england)
| - hart supply in hingham
|

Interesting. I also got better results at Google.
But not the same as yours.

yelp
Freeman
eplastics.com
another online seller
a middleman ad company
hart supply
another online company with a broken website
home depot
another online company
altec
eplastics (again)

Freeman was in there. A couple more in the
area were listed. But most of the listings were
still not highly relevant. I didn't get Fields
Corner at all until I searched for it.
Odd, given that Google has very little to
differentiate the two of us except userAgent
and geographical location. Your returns
may be affected by you allowing script and
cookies.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:


| i didn't see eplastics at all when i do a search for lexan in boston
| using google, ad or otherwise.
|
| what i see on the very first page of results is:
|
| in the map:
| - altec plastics in south boston
| - fields corner glass and lexan in (you guessed it), fields corner
|
| in the listings:
| - jfreeman in dorchester
| - polycarbonate plastics in worcester (covering all of new england)
| - hart supply in hingham
|

Interesting. I also got better results at Google.
But not the same as yours.

yelp
Freeman
eplastics.com
another online seller
a middleman ad company
hart supply
another online company with a broken website
home depot
another online company
altec
eplastics (again)

the yelp listing was for altec plastics, also shown in the map at the
top.

Freeman was in there. A couple more in the
area were listed. But most of the listings were
still not highly relevant. I didn't get Fields
Corner at all until I searched for it.
Odd, given that Google has very little to
differentiate the two of us except userAgent
and geographical location. Your returns
may be affected by you allowing script and
cookies.

i block cookies.

i also get the same results when i set the user agent to internet
explorer 11 (which shouldn't matter anyway).

"Mayayana" on Fri, 29 Sep 2017 11:14:17
-0400 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| the top in allegedly non-paid results. Yet I specifically
| asked about buying plastic in Boston, not online.)
|
| How did you specifically specify that?

"buy lexan Boston"

That doesn't rule out online options, but don't you
think stores near Boston that sell Lexan should have
been listed before a website that takes orders online?
Why would I add "Boston" if I wanted to buy online?
(Note that eplastics.com also bought an ad on that page
where their link showed neaer the top.)


I wonder if word order is important. That is, does "buy lexan
Boston" process differently than "Boston buy lexan"?

Hmm - slight differences. Altexc is #1 in both;
#2 jfreeman.com/plastics-pvc and yellowpages.com

I've started filetering results by -yp.com etccetera.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

In message , Mayayana
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| the top in allegedly non-paid results. Yet I specifically
| asked about buying plastic in Boston, not online.)
|
| How did you specifically specify that?

"buy lexan Boston"

That doesn't rule out online options, but don't you
think stores near Boston that sell Lexan should have
been listed before a website that takes orders online?
Why would I add "Boston" if I wanted to buy online?
(Note that eplastics.com also bought an ad on that page
where their link showed neaer the top.)


It used to be possible to say you only wanted pages that definitely
included specified word(s) - IIRR, by putting + before them (without a
space, e. g. +Boston). I don't know if this is still the case, but it
isn't "indicated" from the advanced pages any more. I use
https://www.google.co.uk/advanced_search?hl=en as my default page (I
imagine the US one is similar, maybe .com instead of .co.uk).

I just tried putting xx in the top box ("all these words"), yy in "any
of these words", and zz in "none of these words". The string it seemed
to have applied itself to seems to be "xx yy -zz", i. e. it has given
the _same_ weight to the first two, which I am not surprised at, since
the top box - despite being called "all these words" - seems to be just
used the same as the simple search page's box. I would have hoped for
"+xx yy -zz" (assuming + still has any meaning), but am not surprised it
didn't.

I don't think Google release the syntax of queries as they used to; you
can to some extent divine it by using the advanced search page (the
above one, or its regional variations) and seeing what it comes up with.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You can be tough without being rude - Nick Clegg, 2014 July

In message , nospam
writes:
In article , Mayayana
wrote:
[]
So an advertising site had the info I needed. If
J. Freeman hadn't bought an ad at MacRae's I might
never have found them.

or if you knew how to use google.

Obviously you think that you do; however, you'd rather not enlighten the
rest of us, for some reason ...
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You can be tough without being rude - Nick Clegg, 2014 July

In message , nospam
writes:
In article , Mayayana
wrote:

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Don't use Google. Use DuckDuckGo, or Startpage, or one of the other
| search engines.
|
| Is that just because of Google's evil aspects, or do they actually work
| better (as search engines, not as anti-evil)?

I generally use DDG but turn to Google when I
can't find things. Google seems to be more thorough.
Or maybe they just have more listings. But in genreal
I find they return pretty much the same listings.

in other words, it doesn't work as well. no surprise there.

On the other hand, all of them have gone downhill.

nonsense. they've all improved and continue to improve.

I disagree to a great extent. I think that as search engines, they
reached an acceptable peak some while ago; granted, there may have been
incremental improvements since then, but they've more than been
countered by (a) commercial contamination [I don't mean just paid ad.s,
of the sort that are indeed indicated by "[Ad]"] (b) increasingly
sophisticated (and mostly dishonest) attempts by others to increase
their ranking.

It's become very difficult, I find, to find less popular and
non-commercial sites. It seems that whatever I search
for, I see the same Wikipedia, Yelp, LinkedIn.... It's
as though the engines think the Internet is 20 sites
and you want one of those. And probably you want
to buy stuff.

generally, those are the sites that people want, so they're ranked
higher.

I disagree fundamentally. Those are the sites that companies want people
to find. Not everyone - and, I suspect, not even a majority - only use
the web when they're wanting to buy something.

A couple of examples:
If I want the datasheet for an integrated circuit, I have great
difficulty in finding it, among all the hits who are wanting to sell it
(the IC, not the datasheet).
If I want to find the website of an eatery _whose name I know_ - for
example, I want to see what's on the menu, because I've been before, and
know it's good, so am taking some friends and want to make sure there's
something they'll like - I often have great difficulty in finding it _at
all_; I get instead lots of places that want to offer me reviews of it.
(Of course, none of those will have today's menu.) [This _may_ only
apply to the UK, but I doubt it.]

Last week I needed to buy a sheet of lexan polycarbonate.
"buy lexan boston" turns up an online seller, Lowes,
Home Depot, Yelp, Hotfrog, Yellow Pages.... A plastics
store in Boston, where I ended up going, was not on
the first page of results. Yet they have a good,
functional website. And there are only a handful of
shops around boston that handle this stuff. So that
store should have been in the top 3.

why should it have been in the top 3? you're not the only one searching.

His search included Boston; it seems entirely reasonable that he should
have expected the list to at least start with outlets in Boston.

if you want to skip stores like lowes, home depot, etc., learn how to
indicate that in your query.

Perhaps you could share some of your great knowledge as to how? (I
suspect you're thinking of the "-" prefix - which isn't the total
solution it ought to be.)
[]
since you blocked that and failed to indicate it in your query, it had
no way of knowing you wanted the smaller stores.

user error.

A bit exaggerated.
[]
paid ads are tagged. you can choose to skip those.

Specific ad.s, yes (and also, for reasons that I can't understand - they
have poor matching; surely this makes them counter-productive, as people
will be more inclined to ignore them?); however, there are more subtle
ways in which less appropriate hits come higher than they should.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You can be tough without being rude - Nick Clegg, 2014 July

In article , J. P. Gilliver
(John) wrote:

| Don't use Google. Use DuckDuckGo, or Startpage, or one of the other
| search engines.
|
| Is that just because of Google's evil aspects, or do they actually work
| better (as search engines, not as anti-evil)?

I generally use DDG but turn to Google when I
can't find things. Google seems to be more thorough.
Or maybe they just have more listings. But in genreal
I find they return pretty much the same listings.

in other words, it doesn't work as well. no surprise there.

On the other hand, all of them have gone downhill.

nonsense. they've all improved and continue to improve.

I disagree to a great extent. I think that as search engines, they
reached an acceptable peak some while ago; granted, there may have been
incremental improvements since then, but they've more than been
countered by (a) commercial contamination [I don't mean just paid ad.s,
of the sort that are indeed indicated by "[Ad]"] (b) increasingly
sophisticated (and mostly dishonest) attempts by others to increase
their ranking.

ads are tagged as such. ignore them, or better yet, block them. problem
solved.

search engines continuously index sites and continue to refine their
ranking algorithms.

you might think it got worse, but most people find that it continues to
get better.

It's become very difficult, I find, to find less popular and
non-commercial sites. It seems that whatever I search
for, I see the same Wikipedia, Yelp, LinkedIn.... It's
as though the engines think the Internet is 20 sites
and you want one of those. And probably you want
to buy stuff.

generally, those are the sites that people want, so they're ranked
higher.

I disagree fundamentally. Those are the sites that companies want people
to find.

all companies want people to find them.

Not everyone - and, I suspect, not even a majority - only use
the web when they're wanting to buy something.

nonsense. most people start with a web search, either from their
computer or their smartphone.

old school phone books are obsolete. word of mouth might come into play
in some rare cases.

the internet is a fantastic resource.

A couple of examples:
If I want the datasheet for an integrated circuit, I have great
difficulty in finding it, among all the hits who are wanting to sell it
(the IC, not the datasheet).

you don't say which integrated circuit, but a search for the classic
555 timer results in the very first link being the datasheet, with the
next few links very relevant.

similarly, a search for the motorola 68000 cpu resulted in the
datasheet and many other useful links.

perhaps there's some obscure chip that might be harder to find, but
only marginally so.

tl;dr user error.

If I want to find the website of an eatery _whose name I know_ - for
example, I want to see what's on the menu, because I've been before, and
know it's good, so am taking some friends and want to make sure there's
something they'll like - I often have great difficulty in finding it _at
all_; I get instead lots of places that want to offer me reviews of it.
(Of course, none of those will have today's menu.) [This _may_ only
apply to the UK, but I doubt it.]

it's trivial to get restaurant menus, assuming the restaurant publishes
them. not all do. if they don't, then there's not a lot anyone can do.

most of the time their menu is on the restaurant's own site, but it may
also be at sites such as openmenu or opentable (often both). some
restaurants have their own apps where you can even order directly.

if you're having difficulty in finding menus, either you're doing
something wrong or the restaurant doesn't publish it.

tl;dr user error.

Last week I needed to buy a sheet of lexan polycarbonate.
"buy lexan boston" turns up an online seller, Lowes,
Home Depot, Yelp, Hotfrog, Yellow Pages.... A plastics
store in Boston, where I ended up going, was not on
the first page of results. Yet they have a good,
functional website. And there are only a handful of
shops around boston that handle this stuff. So that
store should have been in the top 3.

why should it have been in the top 3? you're not the only one searching.

His search included Boston; it seems entirely reasonable that he should
have expected the list to at least start with outlets in Boston.

when i did the lexan search, jfreeman, the one he said he used, was
second in the list, with several others in boston on the first page of
hits. i also found a few he did not.

that means his search query was the problem, not the search engine
ranking.

as the saying goes, garbage in garbage out.

tl;dr user error.

if you want to skip stores like lowes, home depot, etc., learn how to
indicate that in your query.

Perhaps you could share some of your great knowledge as to how? (I
suspect you're thinking of the "-" prefix - which isn't the total
solution it ought to be.)

that, and other refinements to the query string.

some people are very good at finding stuff. others not so much.

ask a librarian to find something and they almost always know exactly
where to look and will find a whole lot of relevant material, no matter
how obscure the request may be.

since you blocked that and failed to indicate it in your query, it had
no way of knowing you wanted the smaller stores.

user error.

A bit exaggerated.

not in the least.

blunt, sure. exaggerated, no.

paid ads are tagged. you can choose to skip those.

Specific ad.s, yes (and also, for reasons that I can't understand - they
have poor matching; surely this makes them counter-productive, as people
will be more inclined to ignore them?); however, there are more subtle
ways in which less appropriate hits come higher than they should.

ads only have poor matching if the user blocks various tracking methods.

otherwise, ad targeting is frighteningly accurate.

and then there are those who block ads entirely and don't see them at
all.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| I disagree fundamentally. Those are the sites that companies want people
| to find. Not everyone - and, I suspect, not even a majority - only use
| the web when they're wanting to buy something.
|
| A couple of examples:
| If I want the datasheet for an integrated circuit, I have great
| difficulty in finding it, among all the hits who are wanting to sell it
| (the IC, not the datasheet).

I have a great example of that. Around 2000-ish I
had an eye problem. Central serous chorioretinopathy.
It's basically a blister, like one might get from yard work,
but on the retina. It causes distorted vision. But it's
a great search term.

The first time I searched I found lots of personal
stories from people who were putting info online in
order to help others. I found out what treatments were
available and what kind of luck people had had. A few
years later I had another blister. I searched again. All
I could find were eye clinics, mostly in Florida for some
reason. It may be that some of the personal sites were
gone. Sites set up on Xoom or Geocities. But it's unlikely
they're all gone. They just don't get counted anymore.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

Sites set up on Xoom or Geocities. But it's unlikely
they're all gone. They just don't get counted anymore.

the ones on geocities are gone because geocities itself is gone.
however, its content is still available if you know where to look.

xoom is a payment processing system, founded in 2001, which is when the
domain appears to have been acquired.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:33:47 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

Don't use Google. Use DuckDuckGo, or Startpage, or one of the other
search engines.

Is that just because of Google's evil aspects, or do they actually work
better (as search engines, not as anti-evil)?

Startpage.com should give you the same results as Google without
actually connecting to Google.

--
s|b

In article , s|b
wrote:

Startpage.com should give you the same results as Google without
actually connecting to Google.

it can't give the same results unless it connects to google, and a
quick check indicates that the results are close, but not the same.