5 ms·

Makes you wonder why none of these people made their own search engine.

by ruang 16y ago

wanderr 16y ago
In the 40's? By the time they would have had an opportunity to apply this to making a search engine, its unlikely that they would be in a position to drop everything they were doing and create a startup, assuming they would even remember the research they did so long ago and realize the insane value of making a search engine like that.
- chancho 16y ago
  I think ruang was referring to Kleinberger, who applied the idea directly to web pages, as opposed to scientific journals or economies. He did it only short while before Page and Brin, and they even cited him. As to why he didn't make a search engine, I'm guessing it's because CMU is in Pittsburgh.
  - neilc 16y ago
    Kleinberg, not Kleinberger, and he's a prof at Cornell, not CMU. I'd guess it has less to with geography, and more to do with the fact that Kleinberg is a (brilliant, celebrated) academic who probably wasn't very interested in doing a startup.
    - elblanco 16y ago
      Agreed, basic research is worlds different than business.
  - joshu 16y ago
    What does Pittsburgh have to do with search engines?
awa 16y ago
During the time when Google came up, there was a considerable interest in search engines in academia, E.g. Some papers by Udi Manber, a prof at Uni of Arizona at that time had these papers: U. Manber, and Peter Bigot, ``The Search Broker,'' First Usenix Symp. on Internet Technologies and Systems, Monterey, CA (December 1997), pp. 231-240. # R. Muth, and U. Manber, ``Approximate Multiple String Search,'' the 7th Annual Combinatorial Pattern Matching Symp., Laguna Beach, CA (June 1996), pp. 75-86. # U. Manber, M. Smith, and B. Gopal, ``WebGlimpse -- Combining Browsing and Searching,'' Usenix 1997 Annual Technical Conference, Anaheim, CA (January 1997), pp. 195-206. U. Manber and P.A. Bigot, ``Connecting Diverse Web Search Facilities,'' Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering 21 (June 1988), pp. 21-27. Ofcourse he was gobbled up by Yahoo at that time and is now a VP at Google
resdirector 16y ago
AFAIK, Google PageRank is part-technology, part-PR. As Paul Graham says (http://www.paulgraham.com/revolution.html#f1n http://www.paulgraham.com/revolution.html#f1n), what made Google wasn't PageRank: they would have succeeded with a different algorithm. What made Google was that they cared about search and did it really well.

Makes you wonder why none of these people made their own search engine.

by ruang 16y ago

Makes you wonder why none of these people made their own search engine.

In the 40's? By the time they would have had an opportunity to apply this to making a search engine, its unlikely that they would be in a position to drop everything they were doing and create a startup, assuming they would even remember the research they did so long ago and realize the insane value of making a search engine like that.

chancho 16y ago
I think ruang was referring to Kleinberger, who applied the idea directly to web pages, as opposed to scientific journals or economies. He did it only short while before Page and Brin, and they even cited him. As to why he didn't make a search engine, I'm guessing it's because CMU is in Pittsburgh.
- neilc 16y ago
  Kleinberg, not Kleinberger, and he's a prof at Cornell, not CMU. I'd guess it has less to with geography, and more to do with the fact that Kleinberg is a (brilliant, celebrated) academic who probably wasn't very interested in doing a startup.
  - elblanco 16y ago
    Agreed, basic research is worlds different than business.
- joshu 16y ago
  What does Pittsburgh have to do with search engines?

awa 16y ago

During the time when Google came up, there was a considerable interest in search engines in academia, E.g. Some papers by Udi Manber, a prof at Uni of Arizona at that time had these papers: U. Manber, and Peter Bigot, ``The Search Broker,'' First Usenix Symp. on Internet Technologies and Systems, Monterey, CA (December 1997), pp. 231-240. # R. Muth, and U. Manber, ``Approximate Multiple String Search,'' the 7th Annual Combinatorial Pattern Matching Symp., Laguna Beach, CA (June 1996), pp. 75-86. # U. Manber, M. Smith, and B. Gopal, ``WebGlimpse -- Combining Browsing and Searching,'' Usenix 1997 Annual Technical Conference, Anaheim, CA (January 1997), pp. 195-206. U. Manber and P.A. Bigot, ``Connecting Diverse Web Search Facilities,'' Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engineering 21 (June 1988), pp. 21-27. Ofcourse he was gobbled up by Yahoo at that time and is now a VP at Google

resdirector 16y ago

AFAIK, Google PageRank is part-technology, part-PR. As Paul Graham says (http://www.paulgraham.com/revolution.html#f1n http://www.paulgraham.com/revolution.html#f1n), what made Google wasn't PageRank: they would have succeeded with a different algorithm. What made Google was that they cared about search and did it really well.