SEO Moz:

Midas Oracle’s homepage is proud to have a PageRank of 6/10.

http://theconversation.edu.au/

- Retired payments.

- Trading the news.

Creative Commons licenses (since 2004 and excluding non-license public domain tools) allow the licensor to require a linkback. I consider that the main feature of the ‘attribution’ term. See 4(b) of http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode

The easiest way to specify is to fill in the ‘Attribute work to URL’ field in the Creative Commons license chooser.

Addendum: Mike Linksvayer’s little blog

Does one of your Creative Commons licenses tell people to link back? That’s all I need.

Video (Download this post if you don’t see the video):

-

UPDATE:

Mike Linksvayer:

CC licenses (since 2004 and excluding non-license public domain tools) allow the licensor to require a linkback. I consider that the main feature of the ‘attribution’ term. See 4(b) of http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode

The easiest way to specify is to fill in the ‘Attribute work to URL’ field in the CC license chooser.

As a result, Midas Oracle is now ahead of the NYT.

TAKEAWAY: Google Search is about both keywords (that, you already knew) and reputation (i.e., inbound links). Incoming links is what any CEO (not just SEO) should be focusing about. Get links, folks. Links is the currency of the Web.

[*] Hence, the power of blog networks —as opposed to solo blogs.

- Use iTools for Macintosh to clean up your Internet footprints.

- iTools will screw up your FireFox bookmarks. Any newly bookmarked URL will be deleted when you restart FireFox. To cure that, read this and do what they tell you to do.

- You will now be able to see the brand-new favicon of Midas Oracle.

- Another useful tool is Favicon Picker, which is a FireFox extension.

- More IT tips and IT links.

P.S.: I should not tell you, but here is the tool I used to create that favicon.

- As you all know, the print newspaper industry is contracting like a melting ice cube planted in the middle of the Sahara.

- Many Old World’s thinkers put the blame on Google. The Mountain View search engine is pictured as the villain, who steals the money from the hands of the content creators (the print newspaper journalists).

- The New World’s thinkers do an excellent job in rebutting the accusations, and explaining the real fundamentals and problematic of the Internet eco-system we now live in.

- That said, I found something very interesting in one of those anti-Google slams:

If media companies want to compete with Google, they need to look at the source of its power — judging good content, which enables Google to be the most efficient and effective distributor of content. They also need to look at Google’s fundamental limitation — its judgment is dependent on OTHER people expressing their judgment of content in the form of links. Above all, they need to look at sources of content judgment that Google currently can’t access, because they are not yet expressed as links on the web.

The balance of power on the web can shift — but only by understanding what the real sources of power are.

The web link under “can shift” sends us to an imaginative conjecture worth the kingdom of DisneyLand about how newspaper websites could become all of the sudden the masters of links and turn the whole Web around in their favor. But the reason why Internet users favored Yahoo! and Google in the first place is that they have understood their users better than their competitors. Why don’t the newspaper people try this approach?