Mahalo cuts staff, Google algorithm alteration to blame?

By Molly McHugh Published March 2, 2011

Cult of Mac may be in the clear, but some of us (ahem, Digital Trends included) haven’t quite made it off Google’s black list yet. Search and how-to video site Mahalo was one of the many sites Sistrix found had been punished by Google’s recent algorithm adjustment, and unfortunately the company is immediately reeling from the effects.

According to various reports, CEO Jason Calacanis and president Jason Rapp sent out a mass e-mail yesterday afternoon claiming they would have to enact sweeping cuts because of the change in Google Search. According to Center Networks, which received the memo, Mahalo will be forced to cut 10 percent of its staff, eliminating “a handful of positions in the company.” The e-mail said that non-essential services would have to go, and part of that will alter its freelance content – meaning that for the moment, it’s halted. However, Mahalo’s video content shouldn’t take a hit. According to Calacanis and Rapp, Google’s alterations didn’t impact its rankings with YouTube. Mahalo partners with YouTube, and apparently that collaboration is still going strong.

Recommended Videos

Perhaps to stay in those good graces, Calacanis wrote on his Twitter account, “Note: We don’t blame @Google for our problems. We support efforts to make better search results & know they always treat partners fairly.” However, he also posed the question: “Which deserve [sic] #1 @Google Rank: How to Play a Xylophone on eHow or @Mahalodotcom” and posted an instructional video from his own site.

Google engineer Amit Singhal told Wired this morning that the company is in the process of restoring legitimate sites’ page rank.

Former Social Media/Web Editor

Before coming to Digital Trends, Molly worked as a freelance writer, occasional photographer, and general technical lackey…

Topics

Computing

How Claude helped my 65-year-old dad finally ditch his handwritten ledgers

AI has a lot to answer for, but this one small win is hard to argue with, at least for me.

Claude app on iPhone

My dad has owned a small business for as long as I can remember, and for just as long, he's kept his books the old-fashioned way. Every sale gets written down by hand so he can file his taxes later. The problem is that his accountant needs this data in Excel, and my dad, who didn’t grow up around computers, has never learned how to use it.

For years, his workaround was paying someone to manually type his handwritten entries into a spreadsheet. It worked, but it was adding additional cost to his business, which he wanted to avoid, but couldn't.

Computing

AI’s energy tax was already concerning. Research says AI agents are over hundred times worse

AI agents could consume 136 times more energy than today's AI, study finds

AI agents

The AI industry's soaring electricity demand has already become a growing concern for governments, utilities, and technology companies. But a new study suggests the next generation of artificial intelligence could make that problem significantly worse.

Researchers from the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) have published what they describe as the first comprehensive analysis of the energy cost of AI agents - AI systems capable of reasoning, planning, and completing tasks autonomously. Their findings show that these systems can consume up to 136.5 times as much energy per query as conventional generative AI models, raising fresh questions about whether the infrastructure supporting tomorrow's AI is ready for what's coming.

Computing

I hope Apple keeps the MacBook Neo away from the AI hype and preserves its true identity

The cheapest MacBook beats the cheapest AI MacBook.

Computer, Electronics, Laptop

If there's one thing that has disrupted consumer tech economics over the last year while changing how we understand and recommend products, it's the ever-rising cost of memory and chips.

The desperate need to scale up AI infrastructure has pushed major manufacturers to prioritize enterprise demand, leaving everyday consumers with far fewer choices. Those available cost significantly more than they did a year ago.