DISCLAIMER: I'm an amateur when it comes to the philosophy and science of search engines. I think a core problem is that what we determine to be "fact" [1] cha

DISCLAIMER: I'm an amateur when it comes to the philosophy and science of search engines. I think a core problem is that what we determine to be "fact" [1] changes over time (as it rightly should). As such, no deterministic function can adequately represent fact, without having a bias. Something that is "fact" today can be made invalidated tomorrow through many methods, scientific and otherwise. Of course, that does not change the importance of "fact" over time (i.e. at one time it was "fact" but it may no longer be). I don't know how Google search algorithms inject randomness into search, but I believe that without enough randomness (and subsequent feedback) and testing, any such algorithm would be deficient. It's almost like you have to A/B test the "facts", in a way. And take into account time. And give each and every fact due consideration. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact