3 ms·

What problem does it actually solve? We already have web search it may not be perfect and certainly does not fit in with the ethics of some people and has many

by noxer 7y ago

What problem does it actually solve? We already have web search it may not be perfect and certainly does not fit in with the ethics of some people and has many many other problems we could and should address. But factually we still have functional web search already. Its not a problem waiting to be solved with blockchain tech. So it looks like it does not solve a web search problem it solves a niche problem for cyperliberalism or something while the real world does not have a search problem. Don't get me wrong. the Project might be awesome. I may even use it some day. But I see it a niche project like I2P or Freenet, It's good that we have these for when we might need it but there is no way people will replace something they use now with it.

nevermindme80 7y ago
Spot on. Well, let's take this part by part. What problems exist with the current search: 1) It is centralized 2) Your data is being used without your approval 3) Companies like Cambridge Analytica build on the semantics field and use it for economics, politics and other purposes. The fact that a semantics field is closed, leads to magnitudes of problems in almost all the fields of your life 4) You cannot search for anything freely. The internet was originally intended for the search of scientific papers, today this is not available. You might say. Hey, i don't nee it. Then its a bit hard to argue. You might not. But the reality is that its the most valuable database we have as humans, our knowledge, which is today projected not by scientific research, but by Wikipedia (owned by alphabet) and by companies like Cambridge Analytica, who build on the semantical field 5) Results aren't provable. At all. There is no proof for any root results - blockchain solves this 6) There are no incentives 7) Knowledge graphs are owed to 90% by one company, which means that the answers you're searching for. The knowledge you're acquiring today is 90% follows a black-box principle and has in it what you are lead to believe etc, etc, etc. TBH, there are about 100 reasons why search should be changed and is crazy underlooked by a lot of people as a problem This is the very tip of the iceberg. And Im glad you bring this up
- noxer 7y ago
  1) Arguably it is centrally controlled but technically its not centralized there is no SPOF. So the kind of centralization you refer too may be unwanted for valid reasons but does not affect its function. 2) That's not an inherent property of web search at all. Its the business model of some web search provider. 3) All true but again has nothing to do with web search. The whole privacy things in general is a problem of web monetization anyway. Private data is collected for ads not for search results. web search is not broken, web monetization probably is. 4) I can search the internet freely. I may not find what I'm looking for because there are laws preventing people from putting stuff on the net and in general webhosters are usually privately owned and can decide to not allow certain things. So if you can't find X its probably because X is not on the net or its intentional hidden because its somehow illegal or just generally unwanted or there is simply no one somehow motivated to host it. The internet is kinda backward if you want to insert something you have to play for that while if you take something is usually "free". So for something to be put online there must be a some kind of motivation else simply no one will do it. This is not a flaw in web search at all. What the internet originally was intended to do seems to be irrelevant. The internet we have now is what we deal with and if enough people want to make a scientific paper library, well then they can build that perfectly fine on the internet we have today. But like I said there must be some kind of motivation. but you can't blame the lack there off to Wikipedia or it's owners and certainly not to web search. 5) Web search is not querying a database where you get 3 results if there are 3 matching entities. Everyone can implement web search the way they want it and think its the most useful. There is nothing to prov. If I search for "1999" I would expect a search engine to give me stuff mostly related to the year 1999. But 1999 is also a prime number. The name of a bunch of albums, tracks, movies and what not. Is the search result now bad because it mostly assumed a year? Its good for me as it did what I expected but may be bad for someone else. 6) Money is the incentives for web search. Obviously that is far from perfect and has a bunch of known flaws but again has nothing to do with web search. Also decentralization/blockchain etc. can not remove the incentive money from the system. 7) That sounds little bit too much conspiracy-theories-like for me. True knowledge over a specific topic is the same regardless of where you got it from. I already agreed to that in my first reply. There is bunch of stuff concerning with today's popular web search services. But its function not broken and I don't see why it would need to be replaced. If a wheel rolls but sometimes breaks we should address that maybe change the material? maybe put some rubber on it? But not re-invent the wheel.

by noxer 7y ago

nevermindme80 7y ago

Spot on. Well, let's take this part by part. What problems exist with the current search: 1) It is centralized 2) Your data is being used without your approval 3) Companies like Cambridge Analytica build on the semantics field and use it for economics, politics and other purposes. The fact that a semantics field is closed, leads to magnitudes of problems in almost all the fields of your life 4) You cannot search for anything freely. The internet was originally intended for the search of scientific papers, today this is not available. You might say. Hey, i don't nee it. Then its a bit hard to argue. You might not. But the reality is that its the most valuable database we have as humans, our knowledge, which is today projected not by scientific research, but by Wikipedia (owned by alphabet) and by companies like Cambridge Analytica, who build on the semantical field 5) Results aren't provable. At all. There is no proof for any root results - blockchain solves this 6) There are no incentives 7) Knowledge graphs are owed to 90% by one company, which means that the answers you're searching for. The knowledge you're acquiring today is 90% follows a black-box principle and has in it what you are lead to believe etc, etc, etc. TBH, there are about 100 reasons why search should be changed and is crazy underlooked by a lot of people as a problem This is the very tip of the iceberg. And Im glad you bring this up

noxer 7y ago
1) Arguably it is centrally controlled but technically its not centralized there is no SPOF. So the kind of centralization you refer too may be unwanted for valid reasons but does not affect its function. 2) That's not an inherent property of web search at all. Its the business model of some web search provider. 3) All true but again has nothing to do with web search. The whole privacy things in general is a problem of web monetization anyway. Private data is collected for ads not for search results. web search is not broken, web monetization probably is. 4) I can search the internet freely. I may not find what I'm looking for because there are laws preventing people from putting stuff on the net and in general webhosters are usually privately owned and can decide to not allow certain things. So if you can't find X its probably because X is not on the net or its intentional hidden because its somehow illegal or just generally unwanted or there is simply no one somehow motivated to host it. The internet is kinda backward if you want to insert something you have to play for that while if you take something is usually "free". So for something to be put online there must be a some kind of motivation else simply no one will do it. This is not a flaw in web search at all. What the internet originally was intended to do seems to be irrelevant. The internet we have now is what we deal with and if enough people want to make a scientific paper library, well then they can build that perfectly fine on the internet we have today. But like I said there must be some kind of motivation. but you can't blame the lack there off to Wikipedia or it's owners and certainly not to web search. 5) Web search is not querying a database where you get 3 results if there are 3 matching entities. Everyone can implement web search the way they want it and think its the most useful. There is nothing to prov. If I search for "1999" I would expect a search engine to give me stuff mostly related to the year 1999. But 1999 is also a prime number. The name of a bunch of albums, tracks, movies and what not. Is the search result now bad because it mostly assumed a year? Its good for me as it did what I expected but may be bad for someone else. 6) Money is the incentives for web search. Obviously that is far from perfect and has a bunch of known flaws but again has nothing to do with web search. Also decentralization/blockchain etc. can not remove the incentive money from the system. 7) That sounds little bit too much conspiracy-theories-like for me. True knowledge over a specific topic is the same regardless of where you got it from. I already agreed to that in my first reply. There is bunch of stuff concerning with today's popular web search services. But its function not broken and I don't see why it would need to be replaced. If a wheel rolls but sometimes breaks we should address that maybe change the material? maybe put some rubber on it? But not re-invent the wheel.