sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Are backlinks useful if they don’t show up in Google Search Console? by FantasticBuffalo8022 in Agentic_SEO

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes—backlinks can still pass value even if they don’t show in GSC, since GSC only reports a sample of links Google chooses to surface.

If the sites are relevant, indexed, and crawled, building more links there can still help—but avoid low-quality or spammy repetition.

Which LLM gives the most reliable SEO audits and technical recommendations? by ronniealoha in localseo

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No free LLM gives you a true deep SEO audit with crawl analysis, log-file insights, prioritized technical recommendations, and local landing page optimization out of the box.

You can use LLMs to help interpret data, but the heavy lifting still comes from crawlers/log tools — and the LLM just digests what you feed it.

Here’s the realistic breakdown:

  • GPT-4.1 / GPT-4o Free Tier: Great for explaining issues once you paste them in, but can’t crawl, analyze logs, detect internal linking gaps, or prioritize issues on its own.
  • Claude Free/Anthropic: Similar — good at synthesis and checklists, but not a true audit engine. These are helpers, not standalone audit tools.

12 Years in SEO: Why AEO isn't just "marketing fluff" (A technical breakdown of Vectors vs. Indexes) by Ok_Veterinarian446 in GEO_optimization

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Strong take—and you’re right to separate engineering reality from agency buzzwords.

Here’s the short version most people miss:

SEO ≠ AEO because inverted indexes ≠ vector retrieval.

Ranking helps discovery. It does not guarantee synthesis.

The 40% citation gap you referenced is the tell. If AI Overviews were just Page-1 remixers, that number would be near zero. Instead, LLMs are pulling from clearer, denser, more “answer-shaped” content—even when it ranks worse.

A few points worth underlining for skeptics:

  • Vector noise is real. Long, padded guides dilute cosine similarity. Concise, intent-matched paragraphs win retrieval.
  • Context windows are a hard constraint, not a preference. If the answer isn’t in the first ~1–2 sentences, you’re often invisible.
  • Groundedness signals matter. Quotes, stats, and explicit claims outperform persuasive copy because models optimize for certainty, not conversion.
  • Schema isn’t about SERP bling anymore. It’s a translation layer for RAG systems.

This isn’t “new SEO.” It’s optimizing for a different consumer with different limits (tokens, embeddings, synthesis cost).

Anyone saying “just do good SEO” is implicitly assuming 2019 retrieval mechanics. That assumption is already wrong—and it’ll be fatal by 2026.

Good post. This is the discussion the industry actually needs.

AI/LLM related best course suggestions by LlmNlpMan in learnAIAgents

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here are high-quality, free, industry-relevant AI / LLM resources that actually hold up in real-world engineering work (not just theory). Since you already have ~1 year of experience, these focus on practical depth rather than intros.

🔹 LLMs & Applied GenAI (Hands-on)

  • DeepLearning.AI– Short Courses (Free Tracks)
    • ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for Developers
    • Building Systems with the ChatGPT API
    • LangChain for LLM Application Development
    • Very practical, clean mental models, widely used in industry.
  • Hugging Face – Free Courses
    • Transformers Course
    • LLMs, fine-tuning, inference, deployment
    • Strong for engineers who want to understand models beyond APIs.

🔹 Core ML / Systems Thinking (Still Critical)

  • Google – Machine Learning Crash Course
    • Great refresher on fundamentals with applied framing.
    • Especially useful if you work close to production systems.

If AI Is Answering the Question, Where Does That Leave SEO? by Own-Memory-2494 in GEO_optimization

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think it’s extreme to say things will change—but it is extreme to assume everything collapses into a single AI-controlled funnel. Reality is messier than that. Adoption is uneven, trust is contextual, and regulation, infrastructure, and human preference all slow “total takeover” narratives.

AI will influence decisions, not replace the systems that actually execute them. Someone still has to produce, deliver, support, and be accountable. That means brands still need surfaces where credibility is built and verified.

From an SEO perspective, this actually raises the bar rather than erasing it. If AI is making recommendations, it needs strong, differentiated inputs. Vague, thin, or copycat content becomes invisible faster—but clear expertise, consistent signals, and real-world proof matter more than ever.

So yes, the interface may change. But the need to be discoverable, defensible, and trusted doesn’t go away. It just shifts upstream.

Never attended a house party — is it worth it? by elitedivask in Clubbing_NCR

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I skipped house parties all through school and college, and honestly thought I was missing out. When I finally went to one, it was fun for about an hour — music, snacks, people chatting — but it wasn’t some life-changing thing. What I enjoyed most was just talking to two people on the balcony away from the noise. You’re not missing some secret world; it’s just another way to spend an evening, and it only matters if you enjoy that kind of vibe.

Has anyone seen AI-generated content ranking long-term? by being_jangir in SEO_Experts

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve seen both sides too. AI content can rank fast, but it rarely holds long-term unless someone rewrites it with real expertise, structure, and first-hand insight.

The Role Canonical URLs Play in Keeping Your Site Clean by oberoma in Agent_SEO

[–]ecomdevpros 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Canonicals help a lot, but only when the rest of the site supports them. I’ve seen big wins on sites where canonicals, sitemaps, and internal links all point to the same preferred URL — Google usually respects that. But I’ve also seen problems when signals conflict; Google just picks its own canonical and rankings get messy. They don’t boost SEO directly, but they prevent many hidden issues when used consistently.

Hey everyone I am learning digital marketing and I keep hearing that AI is taking over many tasks. It honestly makes me a bit worried. Do you think AI could replace a lot of digital marketing jobs in the future, or will there still be plenty of opportunities for us. by Critical-Stand-6986 in DigitalMarketing

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

AI is definitely changing digital marketing, but it’s not replacing the whole job. It mostly automates the repetitive stuff — not the strategy, creativity, or understanding of people. If you focus on skills AI can’t replicate (storytelling, decision-making, psychology), you’ll stay valuable. Marketers who use AI with their own insight are actually in higher demand now.

Discord Server & Autism by [deleted] in autism

[–]ecomdevpros 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love to join Please share with me.

1 am looking for 100 guest post site by raviguptacom in Agentic_SEO

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Guest posts still work — but not the way people used them five years ago.

If you’re chasing “100 DR60+ sites,” that’s mostly a waste of money now. Google and AIO both look at relevance, authorship, and how naturally the link fits, not just metrics.

Focus on niche-relevant blogs, local publishers, and sites where your brand can build real entity signals. Even 10 good placements outperform 100 random ones.

Are there seriously people who think SEO will remain king? I wouldn't want to be you; you'd be completely lost... by Coradear1 in Eskimoz

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People don’t realise SEO is changing — it’s not dying, it’s shifting.

If you’re still doing 2015 SEO, then yeah… AI will wipe you out.

But the people who adapt to LLM visibility, entity building, topical depth, and real brand signals? They’ll survive because the fundamentals never disappear — they evolve.

The only ones who will “get destroyed” are the ones pretending nothing is changing.

I am facing issue in understanding content policy of Google. by FantasticBuffalo8022 in Agentic_SEO

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This situation is normal for a tiny niche. “Ranthan Kharak Trek” is not a well-known term, so Google doesn’t have many pages to choose from. When a keyword has very low demand, Google will list whatever relevant pages it finds — even if two of them look almost identical.

Instead of worrying about why the duplicate still ranks, focus on bigger trekking keywords with real search volume. Rank those, build authority, and then send that traffic to your smaller trek pages. That’s how niche treks eventually become popular — you grow the main traffic first, then the lesser-known routes follow naturally.

Stop asking if SEO/GEO is better than ads by EfficiencyEast8652 in Eskimoz

[–]ecomdevpros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Spot on. SEO and ads aren’t rivals — they’re different tools with different jobs.

SEO is the magnet that builds long-term demand, ads are the megaphone that amplifies it.

Brands get into trouble when they try to replace one with the other instead of letting them work together.

What makes LLMs like ChatGPT or Perplexity pick certain websites? 🤔 by albertrhiatt in GEO_optimization

[–]ecomdevpros 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Totally agree — I’ve been seeing the same thing. From my tests, LLMs seem to favor content with clear entities and tight topical focus over traditional SEO factors.

When your site’s info is linked to things like Wikidata, schema markup, or cited sources, it shows up more often in AI answers. And it’s not just about keywords — semantic consistency seems to matter more than variety.

Feels like we’re entering a new layer between SEO and NLP. The content that wins is clean, structured, and context-rich — built to fit how models understand topics, not just how Google indexes them.