12 ms·

> has seemingly degraded into an approximation of a search engine that has knowledge of only very superficial information, will try to rewrite your queries and

> has seemingly degraded into an approximation of a search engine that has knowledge of only very superficial information, will try to rewrite your queries and omit words (including the very word that makes all the difference...) I think the biggest irony is that the web allows for more adoption of long-tail movements than ever before, and Google has gotten significantly worse at turning these up. I assume this has something to do with the fact that information from the long tail is substantially less searched for than stuff within the normal bounds. This is a nightmare if you have any hobbies that share a common phrase with a vastly more popular hobby, and is especially common when it comes to tech-related activities. I use Linux at home, and I program VBA at work. At home Linux is crossed out of most of the first few pages, and I just get a ton of results about Windows, and at work VBA is crossed off and I get results about VB6 and .NET. Completely. Useless. I can only imagine this has something to do with their increasing reliance on AI, and the fact that the AI is probably incentivized to give a correct response to as many people'above the fold' as is possible. If 95% of people are served by dropping the specifically-chosen search term, then the AI probably thinks it's doing a great job. It seems like the web is being optimized for casual users, and using the internet is no longer as skill you can improve to create a path towards a more meaningful web experience.

philipov 9y ago
It doesn't help that it seems every other project out there is trying to name itself after common words in the lexicon. I dare you to try finding information on the Box library.
- Mystrl 9y ago
  https://ccse.lbl.gov/BoxLib/ https://ccse.lbl.gov/BoxLib/ Is it this thing at the very top of the search results?
  - ReverseCold 9y ago
    Fwiw my first page had nothing to do with anything computer related, except for the last result, which was how to make dialog boxes in Windows. First result: https://littlefreelibrary.org https://littlefreelibrary.org Search: Box library
    - philipov 9y ago
      Moreover, it was neither of the 2 Box libraries I was referring to. So that makes 3. https://www.box.com/ https://www.box.com/ https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-box/ https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-box/
- pjc50 9y ago
  This one? http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/librarylocations.htm?act=show&libCode=BOXLIB http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/librarylocations.htm?act=show&li... It seems that context-sensitive search is a curse as well as a blessing. Wikipedia at least offers you disambiguation pages; perhaps a search engine should let you pick a "domain" to prioritise search in.
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    Didn't Google used to do this, one of the SE did definitely - they'd group results into subject areas.
colordrops 9y ago
This same AI effect can be seen in the Android keyboard, where _properly_ spelled words will be replaced after typing another word or two because it's been determined to be more likely what you want. It's infuriating.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  I was amazed by the Gboard thing though. It usually picks the correct phrases for me.
- derefr 9y ago
  I don't know; I'm pretty happy that I don't have to type apostrophes any more. I can just go on typing words like "ill" and "wed" and it'll figure out after a few more words that those should be "I'll" and "we'd".
  - gh02t 9y ago
    What the parent comment is talking about is something more extreme and I've noticed it too. It sometimes changes prior words that are valid after you have moved on to the next word. It's not correcting the word you just typed, it's correcting a previous word without any sort of feedback like you get for normal corrections- it's going backwards and changing earlier words, and then you try and fix it but the exact same correction applies automatically again over and over. Unfortunately I can't remember any examples at the moment, it's just something that happens to me every so often. They're really irritating though, because they aren't well expressed in the current autocorrect UI (which works on the current word) and it doesn't seem to get the hint when you go back and correct it, so it keeps applying it over and over.
    - derefr 9y ago
      No, that's what I was talking about too—it needs the context of the (part of speech of) the next word to figure out in the cases I mentioned whether I actually intended the (correctly-spelled) word "wed" or the (correctly-spelled) word "we'd". It doesn't change it until after you hit space to commit the word that comes after the "wed" input.
mathattack 9y ago
Yes. The problem seems to be compounded by Google's intention to correct spelling, and (for the long tail searches) to assume you're really just looking for whatever everyone else is searching for.
- chx 9y ago
  Yes! You need to beat Google with a stick to enable searching for the furce awakens (that's not a typo) poster which Disney itself produced. Used to be that quotes around a phrase stopped this typo correcting but no longer. BTW. this is my go-to example for the "piracy is a service problem" -- this is 100% Disney IP for the fans of two billion dollar movies and you can't buy it as a poster. https://images.moviepilot.com/image/upload/c_fill,h_470,q_auto:good,w_620/q2knfc6crmriccrbwpoy.jpg https://images.moviepilot.com/image/upload/c_fill,h_470,q_au... So I went on eBay, found a custom poster printer service and got it printed and shipped for 12.48 USD: https://i.redd.it/x4mmmvayunbx.jpg https://i.redd.it/x4mmmvayunbx.jpg I would've been glad to pay double, triple for an official version but no. You just can't buy it.
  - mirimir 9y ago
    Huh? I just searched for "the furce awakens". And got: Showing results for "the force awakens" Search instead for "the furce awakens" And hitting that got me the Zootopia stuff. So?
    - mattowen_uk 9y ago
      CHX is still right in what they say. The point here is that Google override peoples searches based on some random fuzzy logic, and whatever you've searched before, regardless of whether you are logged in or not.
      - dx034 9y ago
        To be fair, >90% searching for "furce" probably meant force. For the rest it's one click more.
jeffdavis 9y ago
"I assume this has something to do with the fact that information from the long tail is substantially less searched for than stuff within the normal bounds...It seems like the web is being optimized for casual users" In other words, the internet is becoming more of a collective and caters less to the individual. If you have a special interest, then who cares? You should just adopt more normal hobbies. If you have a unique political viewpoint, then get over it and join one of the major parties. If you are oppressed, then it's fine as long as 95% of the people are content (don't worry, we'll carve out a few protected classes so that the pictures still look diverse).
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  It is much worse. It contextually averages everybody, so if 95% of the people are oppressed, but always on different ways, it also doesn't matter.
Cort3z 9y ago
You can add a plus (+) before a word you require to be in the search results. Eg. "+VBS array loop". You can filter out word by prepending a minus (-). You can surround exact phrases in quotes (") and you can even allow synonyms by prepending a tilde "~" Example query: +vbs array ~loop "magic number" If Google does not find anything it will remove some parts so that you will get any results at all
- haraldooo 9y ago
  Didn‘t they drop the + operator when they launched Google+? I thought now you have to surround your term with „“ instead of +?
  - Cort3z 9y ago
    Yeah, you are right; https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en They even dropped tilde :( But you might be able to achieve the same things with their advanced search; https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en
  - GordonS 9y ago
    Yes, you're right, they did this a looong time ago... BUT, sometimes Google still insists on showing you results that don't contain the word or phrase that you've explicitly requested must be in the results - utterly infuriating!
    - krisdol 9y ago
      You now have to go into Search Settings -> Verbatim. Unfortunately you’d have to do this for each search session as it doesn’t persist.
      - FroshKiller 9y ago
        In Chrome, I've set up Google Verbatim as a search engine and made that the default address bar search. Here is the URL format: {google:baseURL}search?{google:RLZ}{google:acceptedSuggestion}{google:originalQueryForSuggestion}{google:searchFieldtrialParameter}{google:instantFieldTrialGroupParameter}sourceid=chrome&ie={inputEncoding}&q=%s&tbs=li:1
Double_a_92 9y ago
> the AI is probably incentivized to give a correct response to as many people I'd bet it's probably trained to maximize clicks on ads... Just like youtubes algorithm is trained to maximize viewing time (and thus ads you see), instead of showing you videos you'd actually enjoy more.
- brokenmachine 9y ago
  > trained to maximize viewing time (and thus ads you see), instead of showing you videos you'd actually enjoy more. How would youtube quantize how much enjoyment you're having, if not by tracking viewing time? As an aside, when watching youtube on my TV, I don't think there's a way to thumbs up or down videos. Even on my PC, when the video is in fullscreen, there's no way to thumbs up or down either.
dotancohen 9y ago
> It seems like the web is being optimized for casual users, and using the internet is no longer as skill you can improve to create a path towards a more meaningful web experience. No. _Google_ is being optimized for casual users, and using _Google_ is no longer a skill you can improve to create a path towards a more meaningful web experience.
jokermatt999 9y ago
I'm not sure I've got a fully formed concept here, but I'm throwing it out in case someone finds it interesting. Re: long-tail movements and switching contexts between work and home, I wonder if a better example isn't much better user or persona management. Every person is interested in more than just one thing, and can conceivably be looking for the same word in two contexts. Down below, a multi-lingual speaker has given up on predictive keyboards. What if we could enable users to switch personas/contexts as intuitively and easily as people code-switch in real conversations? Setting up the profiles would be messy and cumbersome at first which probably kills the idea dead in my hands. I'm not knowledgeable enough about psychology or machine learning to figure out if that could be solved automatically.
- hrktb 9y ago
  One of the difficulties I see with this approach is to identify personas. It would be fine it was work + home persona. I feel though that it woild end up like work local branch + work parent company report + work programming + home family member + home personal hobbies + home grand parent’s health For context I already have two IDs for work and private stuff, I still hit a lot of barriers on Google search and ended up in ddg, using the location switch when needed.
  - zentiggr 9y ago
    A bit on the snarky side I realize, but someone at Facebook has probably already dug into this. Whether or not they'll admit it or discuss it publicly is far less likely.
tripzilch 9y ago
> I can only imagine this has something to do with their increasing reliance on AI, and the fact that the AI is probably incentivized to give a correct response to as many people'above the fold' as is possible. If 95% of people are served by dropping the specifically-chosen search term, then the AI probably thinks it's doing a great job. There has to be an additional reason though, otherwise they could've just put the AI "enhanced" above the fold, and append the actual accurate results below it, for the people doing research.
nine_k 9y ago
Let's not forget that Google is an ad company, operating a search engine for that purpose. I bet long-tail queries, while capable of carrying very targeted ads with a high CTR, are just too rare and thus less profitable. Likely much more people have basically no clue and formulate queries approximately, and very few query precisely in improbable ways, so getting the majority to the results they "meant" gives better financial results. To tell the truth, you still can enter the "verbatim mode" using a menu, and try to find that improbable cluster of words. It's an advanced feature now, requiring a bit of digging, but it's there.
stcredzero 9y ago
I think the biggest irony is that the web allows for more adoption of long-tail movements than ever before, and Google has gotten significantly worse at turning these up. I assume this has something to do with the fact that information from the long tail is substantially less searched for than stuff within the normal bounds. Google wants you to be mainstream now. If everyone thinks the same and wants the same things -- even if contextually as a member of one of a couple of hundred disparate "marketing cohort" categories -- it will be far easier to target advertising to you. It's in Google's interest for you to conform now. Be easy to categorize. Be easy to predict. So think the same as the members of your peer group, so they can sell hyper-targeted advertising to other corporations. (Have you noticed that social media tends to motivate you to conform?) Google has no use for the long tail anymore -- no use for quirky and inscrutable scenes and subcultures. Instead, it now has the cultural power to transform you (the product) into an even better product. Remember: 1. If you're not paying for the service, you are not the customer. You are the product. 2. Given sufficient quantity and concentration, Power corrupts. Always.
- callalex 9y ago
  I see quite the opposite inceintive for Google. If you are a very eccentric individual and they know those quirks, they have a huge competitive advantage in targeting ads to you vs. some bulk radio broadcast ad etc.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    I see quite the opposite incentive for Google. If you are a very eccentric individual and they know those quirks, they have a huge competitive advantage in targeting ads to you vs. some bulk radio broadcast ad etc. However, the observation of this article, and my observation as well, is that Google isn't currently capable of parsing very individual quirks. Rather, Google is able to place you into one of a number of highly conformist boxes. They don't have to understand you as an individual. They just have to 'box' you more effectively than their competitors. There is nothing in the market or otherwise emergent in the nature of data and such categorization which fundamentally motivates Google to be able to parse anyone's quirks or understand the essence of a scene or artistic movement. If Google can gain a competitive advantage by creating a number of honeytrap doppelgangers which draw people away from the long tail and sequester them into un-creative, imitative, and highly conformist boxes, then so much the better for them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9OHn5ZF4Uo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9OHn5ZF4Uo http://lesswrong.com/lw/l8/conjuring_an_evolution_to_serve_you/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/l8/conjuring_an_evolution_to_serve_y... In much the same way, I find that recommendation engines come up with annoying pale imitations of bands/musicians I like. I also wonder why authoritarianism seems to spread so effectively across social media, and why certain authoritarian movements seem to get such ready support from within Google and various social media companies. It's because, as a product, conformist/authoritarian screechers are more easily herded, replicated, categorized, and packaged than real individuals who think for themselves and apply principles.
rlucas 9y ago
This is [one of] the dark side[s] of the "adaptive" or "personalized" Web. The more adaptive and less deterministic, the less collaboratively and reliably useful it is, even if it happens to be better at serving attention-monster momentary gratification of the meme du jour. The reliance on advertising revenue models means that all such Web properties morph into being essentially adversarial attention traps against users. I would pay $50/month in a heartbeat for access to a no-ads, deterministic, guts-openened-with-API Google type engine (even if rate limited at that price to some high-human volume of usage).
- grkvlt 9y ago
  > pay $50/month in a heartbeat for access to a [...] Google type engine Never. And definitely not at USD 50 per month. That is a huge amount for this, although I suspect you're a pretty rare customer and/or exaggerating. Broadband or Mobile service, Satellite TV, etc. all have packages that cost about this much. Even a magazine subscription is a fraction of this amount, Netflix is only about 5-10 dollars a month, isn't it? I could see people paying 10% of the Netflix (ad free TV) charge for an ad free search engine maybe so USD 0.50 to 1.00 per month, 1% of your suggestion...

philipov 9y ago

It doesn't help that it seems every other project out there is trying to name itself after common words in the lexicon. I dare you to try finding information on the Box library.

Mystrl 9y ago
https://ccse.lbl.gov/BoxLib/ https://ccse.lbl.gov/BoxLib/ Is it this thing at the very top of the search results?
- ReverseCold 9y ago
  Fwiw my first page had nothing to do with anything computer related, except for the last result, which was how to make dialog boxes in Windows. First result: https://littlefreelibrary.org https://littlefreelibrary.org Search: Box library
  - philipov 9y ago
    Moreover, it was neither of the 2 Box libraries I was referring to. So that makes 3. https://www.box.com/ https://www.box.com/ https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-box/ https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-box/
pjc50 9y ago
This one? http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/librarylocations.htm?act=show&libCode=BOXLIB http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/librarylocations.htm?act=show&li... It seems that context-sensitive search is a curse as well as a blessing. Wikipedia at least offers you disambiguation pages; perhaps a search engine should let you pick a "domain" to prioritise search in.
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  Didn't Google used to do this, one of the SE did definitely - they'd group results into subject areas.

colordrops 9y ago

This same AI effect can be seen in the Android keyboard, where _properly_ spelled words will be replaced after typing another word or two because it's been determined to be more likely what you want. It's infuriating.

dingo_bat 9y ago
I was amazed by the Gboard thing though. It usually picks the correct phrases for me.
derefr 9y ago
I don't know; I'm pretty happy that I don't have to type apostrophes any more. I can just go on typing words like "ill" and "wed" and it'll figure out after a few more words that those should be "I'll" and "we'd".
- gh02t 9y ago
  What the parent comment is talking about is something more extreme and I've noticed it too. It sometimes changes prior words that are valid after you have moved on to the next word. It's not correcting the word you just typed, it's correcting a previous word without any sort of feedback like you get for normal corrections- it's going backwards and changing earlier words, and then you try and fix it but the exact same correction applies automatically again over and over. Unfortunately I can't remember any examples at the moment, it's just something that happens to me every so often. They're really irritating though, because they aren't well expressed in the current autocorrect UI (which works on the current word) and it doesn't seem to get the hint when you go back and correct it, so it keeps applying it over and over.
  - derefr 9y ago
    No, that's what I was talking about too—it needs the context of the (part of speech of) the next word to figure out in the cases I mentioned whether I actually intended the (correctly-spelled) word "wed" or the (correctly-spelled) word "we'd". It doesn't change it until after you hit space to commit the word that comes after the "wed" input.

mathattack 9y ago

Yes. The problem seems to be compounded by Google's intention to correct spelling, and (for the long tail searches) to assume you're really just looking for whatever everyone else is searching for.

chx 9y ago
Yes! You need to beat Google with a stick to enable searching for the furce awakens (that's not a typo) poster which Disney itself produced. Used to be that quotes around a phrase stopped this typo correcting but no longer. BTW. this is my go-to example for the "piracy is a service problem" -- this is 100% Disney IP for the fans of two billion dollar movies and you can't buy it as a poster. https://images.moviepilot.com/image/upload/c_fill,h_470,q_auto:good,w_620/q2knfc6crmriccrbwpoy.jpg https://images.moviepilot.com/image/upload/c_fill,h_470,q_au... So I went on eBay, found a custom poster printer service and got it printed and shipped for 12.48 USD: https://i.redd.it/x4mmmvayunbx.jpg https://i.redd.it/x4mmmvayunbx.jpg I would've been glad to pay double, triple for an official version but no. You just can't buy it.
- mirimir 9y ago
  Huh? I just searched for "the furce awakens". And got: Showing results for "the force awakens" Search instead for "the furce awakens" And hitting that got me the Zootopia stuff. So?
  - mattowen_uk 9y ago
    CHX is still right in what they say. The point here is that Google override peoples searches based on some random fuzzy logic, and whatever you've searched before, regardless of whether you are logged in or not.
    - dx034 9y ago
      To be fair, >90% searching for "furce" probably meant force. For the rest it's one click more.

jeffdavis 9y ago

"I assume this has something to do with the fact that information from the long tail is substantially less searched for than stuff within the normal bounds...It seems like the web is being optimized for casual users" In other words, the internet is becoming more of a collective and caters less to the individual. If you have a special interest, then who cares? You should just adopt more normal hobbies. If you have a unique political viewpoint, then get over it and join one of the major parties. If you are oppressed, then it's fine as long as 95% of the people are content (don't worry, we'll carve out a few protected classes so that the pictures still look diverse).

marcosdumay 9y ago
It is much worse. It contextually averages everybody, so if 95% of the people are oppressed, but always on different ways, it also doesn't matter.

Cort3z 9y ago

You can add a plus (+) before a word you require to be in the search results. Eg. "+VBS array loop". You can filter out word by prepending a minus (-). You can surround exact phrases in quotes (") and you can even allow synonyms by prepending a tilde "~" Example query: +vbs array ~loop "magic number" If Google does not find anything it will remove some parts so that you will get any results at all

haraldooo 9y ago
Didn‘t they drop the + operator when they launched Google+? I thought now you have to surround your term with „“ instead of +?
- Cort3z 9y ago
  Yeah, you are right; https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en They even dropped tilde :( But you might be able to achieve the same things with their advanced search; https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en
- GordonS 9y ago
  Yes, you're right, they did this a looong time ago... BUT, sometimes Google still insists on showing you results that don't contain the word or phrase that you've explicitly requested must be in the results - utterly infuriating!
  - krisdol 9y ago
    You now have to go into Search Settings -> Verbatim. Unfortunately you’d have to do this for each search session as it doesn’t persist.
    - FroshKiller 9y ago
      In Chrome, I've set up Google Verbatim as a search engine and made that the default address bar search. Here is the URL format: {google:baseURL}search?{google:RLZ}{google:acceptedSuggestion}{google:originalQueryForSuggestion}{google:searchFieldtrialParameter}{google:instantFieldTrialGroupParameter}sourceid=chrome&ie={inputEncoding}&q=%s&tbs=li:1

Double_a_92 9y ago

> the AI is probably incentivized to give a correct response to as many people I'd bet it's probably trained to maximize clicks on ads... Just like youtubes algorithm is trained to maximize viewing time (and thus ads you see), instead of showing you videos you'd actually enjoy more.

brokenmachine 9y ago
> trained to maximize viewing time (and thus ads you see), instead of showing you videos you'd actually enjoy more. How would youtube quantize how much enjoyment you're having, if not by tracking viewing time? As an aside, when watching youtube on my TV, I don't think there's a way to thumbs up or down videos. Even on my PC, when the video is in fullscreen, there's no way to thumbs up or down either.

dotancohen 9y ago

> It seems like the web is being optimized for casual users, and using the internet is no longer as skill you can improve to create a path towards a more meaningful web experience. No. _Google_ is being optimized for casual users, and using _Google_ is no longer a skill you can improve to create a path towards a more meaningful web experience.

jokermatt999 9y ago

I'm not sure I've got a fully formed concept here, but I'm throwing it out in case someone finds it interesting. Re: long-tail movements and switching contexts between work and home, I wonder if a better example isn't much better user or persona management. Every person is interested in more than just one thing, and can conceivably be looking for the same word in two contexts. Down below, a multi-lingual speaker has given up on predictive keyboards. What if we could enable users to switch personas/contexts as intuitively and easily as people code-switch in real conversations? Setting up the profiles would be messy and cumbersome at first which probably kills the idea dead in my hands. I'm not knowledgeable enough about psychology or machine learning to figure out if that could be solved automatically.

hrktb 9y ago
One of the difficulties I see with this approach is to identify personas. It would be fine it was work + home persona. I feel though that it woild end up like work local branch + work parent company report + work programming + home family member + home personal hobbies + home grand parent’s health For context I already have two IDs for work and private stuff, I still hit a lot of barriers on Google search and ended up in ddg, using the location switch when needed.
- zentiggr 9y ago
  A bit on the snarky side I realize, but someone at Facebook has probably already dug into this. Whether or not they'll admit it or discuss it publicly is far less likely.

tripzilch 9y ago

> I can only imagine this has something to do with their increasing reliance on AI, and the fact that the AI is probably incentivized to give a correct response to as many people'above the fold' as is possible. If 95% of people are served by dropping the specifically-chosen search term, then the AI probably thinks it's doing a great job. There has to be an additional reason though, otherwise they could've just put the AI "enhanced" above the fold, and append the actual accurate results below it, for the people doing research.

nine_k 9y ago

Let's not forget that Google is an ad company, operating a search engine for that purpose. I bet long-tail queries, while capable of carrying very targeted ads with a high CTR, are just too rare and thus less profitable. Likely much more people have basically no clue and formulate queries approximately, and very few query precisely in improbable ways, so getting the majority to the results they "meant" gives better financial results. To tell the truth, you still can enter the "verbatim mode" using a menu, and try to find that improbable cluster of words. It's an advanced feature now, requiring a bit of digging, but it's there.

stcredzero 9y ago

I think the biggest irony is that the web allows for more adoption of long-tail movements than ever before, and Google has gotten significantly worse at turning these up. I assume this has something to do with the fact that information from the long tail is substantially less searched for than stuff within the normal bounds. Google wants you to be mainstream now. If everyone thinks the same and wants the same things -- even if contextually as a member of one of a couple of hundred disparate "marketing cohort" categories -- it will be far easier to target advertising to you. It's in Google's interest for you to conform now. Be easy to categorize. Be easy to predict. So think the same as the members of your peer group, so they can sell hyper-targeted advertising to other corporations. (Have you noticed that social media tends to motivate you to conform?) Google has no use for the long tail anymore -- no use for quirky and inscrutable scenes and subcultures. Instead, it now has the cultural power to transform you (the product) into an even better product. Remember: 1. If you're not paying for the service, you are not the customer. You are the product. 2. Given sufficient quantity and concentration, Power corrupts. Always.

callalex 9y ago
I see quite the opposite inceintive for Google. If you are a very eccentric individual and they know those quirks, they have a huge competitive advantage in targeting ads to you vs. some bulk radio broadcast ad etc.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  I see quite the opposite incentive for Google. If you are a very eccentric individual and they know those quirks, they have a huge competitive advantage in targeting ads to you vs. some bulk radio broadcast ad etc. However, the observation of this article, and my observation as well, is that Google isn't currently capable of parsing very individual quirks. Rather, Google is able to place you into one of a number of highly conformist boxes. They don't have to understand you as an individual. They just have to 'box' you more effectively than their competitors. There is nothing in the market or otherwise emergent in the nature of data and such categorization which fundamentally motivates Google to be able to parse anyone's quirks or understand the essence of a scene or artistic movement. If Google can gain a competitive advantage by creating a number of honeytrap doppelgangers which draw people away from the long tail and sequester them into un-creative, imitative, and highly conformist boxes, then so much the better for them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9OHn5ZF4Uo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9OHn5ZF4Uo http://lesswrong.com/lw/l8/conjuring_an_evolution_to_serve_you/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/l8/conjuring_an_evolution_to_serve_y... In much the same way, I find that recommendation engines come up with annoying pale imitations of bands/musicians I like. I also wonder why authoritarianism seems to spread so effectively across social media, and why certain authoritarian movements seem to get such ready support from within Google and various social media companies. It's because, as a product, conformist/authoritarian screechers are more easily herded, replicated, categorized, and packaged than real individuals who think for themselves and apply principles.

rlucas 9y ago

This is [one of] the dark side[s] of the "adaptive" or "personalized" Web. The more adaptive and less deterministic, the less collaboratively and reliably useful it is, even if it happens to be better at serving attention-monster momentary gratification of the meme du jour. The reliance on advertising revenue models means that all such Web properties morph into being essentially adversarial attention traps against users. I would pay $50/month in a heartbeat for access to a no-ads, deterministic, guts-openened-with-API Google type engine (even if rate limited at that price to some high-human volume of usage).

grkvlt 9y ago
> pay $50/month in a heartbeat for access to a [...] Google type engine Never. And definitely not at USD 50 per month. That is a huge amount for this, although I suspect you're a pretty rare customer and/or exaggerating. Broadband or Mobile service, Satellite TV, etc. all have packages that cost about this much. Even a magazine subscription is a fraction of this amount, Netflix is only about 5-10 dollars a month, isn't it? I could see people paying 10% of the Netflix (ad free TV) charge for an ad free search engine maybe so USD 0.50 to 1.00 per month, 1% of your suggestion...