4 ms·

Can you please provide an example of this type of search?

by j_s 9y ago

godelski 9y ago
I look for scientific papers a lot and have found that I'm getting a lot more sites like IFLS or Ars that are reporting on said paper. Or I'll get related studies, but not the one I'm looking for, when the related studies definitely don't contain a word I'm using. This is even expanding into my code search. Like I'll type "do something os related python linux" and get commands for windows as the first few hits. Clearly I don't want windows.
- j_s 9y ago
  Like a link please, I want to see "null or with random results". Not sure how customized results affect things though.
  - godelski 9y ago
    I can only account for my experiences. Only time I've ever had null results was when looking for really obscure things. I'm not the person that you originally replied to.
    - j_s 9y ago
      Thanks for taking the time to provide a specific example where the results weren't up to your standards.
fao_ 9y ago
I could spend a good hour or two of my time scouring through my web history for the things that you ask for proof of, or you could take what I said (Like anything on the internet, or based on recollection) with a pinch of salt. It happens just infrequently enough that it is both difficult to find proof of, and annoying when it happens. The null case does not happen so often as the case where nonsensical answers are returned. Needless to say I am not going to do the former, because it was intended to be an anecdote indicative of the general case -- so example-specific solutions are not likely to be transferable, because I don't hand portions of my web history to random people to prove something, and also because I have better things to do.
- j_s 9y ago
  Thanks for 138 words to explain no proof of your original 43 (making what I personally consider to be a rather extraordinary claim) since you have better things to do? I'll go with several times more than a pinch and keep an eye out to document this phenomenon a bit more thoroughly should it ever happen to me. Success to you!
  - fao_ 9y ago
    It's interesting to me that it took me one minute to write 138 words, thank you for that neat fact. And congratulations on a comment that is otherwise pretty useless. For the record, you do not have the right to demand that someone use their time to prove something that is only of interest to you, nor do you have the right to demand that someone debate you. It is extremely arrogant and self-righteous of you to state otherwise.
    - j_s 9y ago
      Since we are going "for the record" (on a site where comments can't be deleted after an hour and a particular user record's karma column value is doubtless a part of consideration for ~$70,000 or whatever it is now) ... > Can you please provide an example of this type of search? My "arrogant and self-righteous" "demand that someone use their time to prove something that is only of interest to" me >> demand that someone debate you Not found. Apologies for any failures of communication or reading comprehension on my part? Peace!
      - fao_ 9y ago
        Yes, you are correct, it wasn't the question. It was the response to not getting what you wanted that made the original question tone-shift into a demand. >> demand that someone debate you > Not found. Sure. I left that in for prosperity.
        j_s 9y ago
        If you have time, would you mind sharing what you would consider to be a non-demanding example of how I could thank you for following up, explain that I was doing exactly what you asked (re: salt), and promise that going forward I would be on the lookout for examples of my own -- all without any risk of confusion on my part being interpreted as a "tone-shift into a demand"? I am surprised to discover the hard way how the intricacies of tone could cause anyone to document "for the record" an implication that I wrote something that I didn't write (re: demand), and then claim that I have written "arrogant and self-righteous" statements demonstrating my incorrectly supposed possession of two oddly specific non-existent rights (re: 1. others' use of time, and 2. debate) when I wrote no such thing. I truly appreciate the potential value of this opportunity to learn from your feedback; please don't interpret this new request as a demand! (You are of course as always welcome to just say no [thanks?] or to not respond, among many other options.) Perhaps my takeaway should be to add a disclaimer similar to the one immediately preceding this sentence to future questions; my mistake may be rooted in taking for granted what I believed to be understood by all as core to the function of this particular means of communication. PS. FWIW, I have upvoted all of your replies as is my habit in very small part to thank you for your time.

Can you please provide an example of this type of search?

by j_s 9y ago

Can you please provide an example of this type of search?

I look for scientific papers a lot and have found that I'm getting a lot more sites like IFLS or Ars that are reporting on said paper. Or I'll get related studies, but not the one I'm looking for, when the related studies definitely don't contain a word I'm using. This is even expanding into my code search. Like I'll type "do something os related python linux" and get commands for windows as the first few hits. Clearly I don't want windows.

j_s 9y ago
Like a link please, I want to see "null or with random results". Not sure how customized results affect things though.
- godelski 9y ago
  I can only account for my experiences. Only time I've ever had null results was when looking for really obscure things. I'm not the person that you originally replied to.
  - j_s 9y ago
    Thanks for taking the time to provide a specific example where the results weren't up to your standards.

fao_ 9y ago

I could spend a good hour or two of my time scouring through my web history for the things that you ask for proof of, or you could take what I said (Like anything on the internet, or based on recollection) with a pinch of salt. It happens just infrequently enough that it is both difficult to find proof of, and annoying when it happens. The null case does not happen so often as the case where nonsensical answers are returned. Needless to say I am not going to do the former, because it was intended to be an anecdote indicative of the general case -- so example-specific solutions are not likely to be transferable, because I don't hand portions of my web history to random people to prove something, and also because I have better things to do.

j_s 9y ago
Thanks for 138 words to explain no proof of your original 43 (making what I personally consider to be a rather extraordinary claim) since you have better things to do? I'll go with several times more than a pinch and keep an eye out to document this phenomenon a bit more thoroughly should it ever happen to me. Success to you!
- fao_ 9y ago
  It's interesting to me that it took me one minute to write 138 words, thank you for that neat fact. And congratulations on a comment that is otherwise pretty useless. For the record, you do not have the right to demand that someone use their time to prove something that is only of interest to you, nor do you have the right to demand that someone debate you. It is extremely arrogant and self-righteous of you to state otherwise.
  - j_s 9y ago
    Since we are going "for the record" (on a site where comments can't be deleted after an hour and a particular user record's karma column value is doubtless a part of consideration for ~$70,000 or whatever it is now) ... > Can you please provide an example of this type of search? My "arrogant and self-righteous" "demand that someone use their time to prove something that is only of interest to" me >> demand that someone debate you Not found. Apologies for any failures of communication or reading comprehension on my part? Peace!
    - fao_ 9y ago
      Yes, you are correct, it wasn't the question. It was the response to not getting what you wanted that made the original question tone-shift into a demand. >> demand that someone debate you > Not found. Sure. I left that in for prosperity.
      - j_s 9y ago
        If you have time, would you mind sharing what you would consider to be a non-demanding example of how I could thank you for following up, explain that I was doing exactly what you asked (re: salt), and promise that going forward I would be on the lookout for examples of my own -- all without any risk of confusion on my part being interpreted as a "tone-shift into a demand"? I am surprised to discover the hard way how the intricacies of tone could cause anyone to document "for the record" an implication that I wrote something that I didn't write (re: demand), and then claim that I have written "arrogant and self-righteous" statements demonstrating my incorrectly supposed possession of two oddly specific non-existent rights (re: 1. others' use of time, and 2. debate) when I wrote no such thing. I truly appreciate the potential value of this opportunity to learn from your feedback; please don't interpret this new request as a demand! (You are of course as always welcome to just say no [thanks?] or to not respond, among many other options.) Perhaps my takeaway should be to add a disclaimer similar to the one immediately preceding this sentence to future questions; my mistake may be rooted in taking for granted what I believed to be understood by all as core to the function of this particular means of communication. PS. FWIW, I have upvoted all of your replies as is my habit in very small part to thank you for your time.