4 ms·
On the other hand, if you think about it, working on improving the quality of a search engine's results is tweaking its algorithm until it shows the results you
by euyyn 10y ago
On the other hand, if you think about it, working on improving the quality of a search engine's results is tweaking its algorithm until it shows the results you think are better. A search engine that presents you with relevant, true information on a subject you don't know about (or about which you might be misinformed) sounds more quality IMO than one that doesn't. I hope the algorithm is generic (instead of one-ofs for specific subjects).
- kahrkunne 10y agoFor this specific example it's alright, but when Google starts responding to public pressure by tweaking the algorithm to get rid of specific results, it's not that big a step going from something like this to something more questionable.
- konceptz 10y agoDid we forget what page rank was? A way to find relevant and accurate information on the internet. This is why edu pages and pages with many (reputable) citations were ranked higher. Remember this is not twitter where popularity = truth. I do agree that it's dangerous but it's not new; this is built into the DNA of google searching.
- inimino 10y agoI very much doubt that it is generic. Unless they have an artificial intelligence that analyzes queries, reviews the whole of human knowledge and determines the truth, and then prioritizes search results accordingly, it would seem more likely that they are manually stepping in. Once the media got hold of this story it isn't surprising they took action. I would guess they are simply adding an "odiousness" factor to some sites which will penalize them in search results, or giving a boost to "consensus" sites as necessary until the results are socially and politically acceptable.