3 ms·

You make my point better than I could! You just explained to me that my query, which every human understood perfectly, is stupidly understood as "used cars", so

You make my point better than I could! You just explained to me that my query, which every human understood perfectly, is stupidly understood as "used cars", so Google is a basic keyword algorithm and this still doesn't explain result #5. Really, I'm smart enough to understand your explanation of how the tool works. The problem is that I'm in the 99th percentile in the field of "computer keyword understanding" over the general Internet population. So what does that say about the tool?

froo 17y ago
>So what does that say about the tool? That there is probably room in the market for more search engines - perhaps specifically ones that specialise in translating only human queries and returning results rather than trying to be more general like Google is. Like almost all professions that utilise tools in some way, sometimes you just need more specialised tools. A chef wouldn't be that great if he (or she) only had knives to cook with.
scott_s 17y ago
Honestly, I think you under-estimate the general population's ability to learn how to use a tool. I think being able to explain why the results are what they are takes another level of understanding. But I think - and, yes, this is an unsubstantiated claim based on personal bias and anecdote - that many people have developed an intuitive feel for how to craft a decent Google query. They may not be able to tell you why they say what they say, but they can still say it. Personally, I think Google is a good tool. I feel my mental model of it is relatively simple, and from that, I can mostly get what I want. This is also a good time to plug a great article on tools: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/wolfram-alpha-and-hubristic-user.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/wolfram... edit: My explanation was not that Google understand your search to be "used cars." My explanation was based on the assumption that you were looking for a place, online, to buy used cars from. The keywords "online" and "leader," muddied that. The search for "used cars" yields many places to buy used cars from, and the top entries are probably the "leaders."

froo 17y ago

>So what does that say about the tool? That there is probably room in the market for more search engines - perhaps specifically ones that specialise in translating only human queries and returning results rather than trying to be more general like Google is. Like almost all professions that utilise tools in some way, sometimes you just need more specialised tools. A chef wouldn't be that great if he (or she) only had knives to cook with.

scott_s 17y ago

Honestly, I think you under-estimate the general population's ability to learn how to use a tool. I think being able to explain why the results are what they are takes another level of understanding. But I think - and, yes, this is an unsubstantiated claim based on personal bias and anecdote - that many people have developed an intuitive feel for how to craft a decent Google query. They may not be able to tell you why they say what they say, but they can still say it. Personally, I think Google is a good tool. I feel my mental model of it is relatively simple, and from that, I can mostly get what I want. This is also a good time to plug a great article on tools: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/wolfram-alpha-and-hubristic-user.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/wolfram... edit: My explanation was not that Google understand your search to be "used cars." My explanation was based on the assumption that you were looking for a place, online, to buy used cars from. The keywords "online" and "leader," muddied that. The search for "used cars" yields many places to buy used cars from, and the top entries are probably the "leaders."