3 ms·
There's a common thread in every one of the good sources of search information: user curated content. Usually: voted on/curated by members who are specialized
by nwienert 6y ago
There's a common thread in every one of the good sources of search information: user curated content.
Usually: voted on/curated by members who are specialized in some way (reddit, so, hn, wikipedia to a degree).
The fallbacks are editorial sites.
If you make a search engine that focused on indexing user-curated sites + results outside of that that are themselves curated/voted-on by your search engine users (ie, you and others could upvote axios and Amazon as a good source), I think you'd have an interesting model. Basically, take the HN/reddit model to search itself.
- ChefboyOG 6y agoThis is the essence of what Google implements. Links between sites are a form of user curation, user behavior (clicks, read throughs, bounce rate, etc.) are like inferred votes. The problem is, everything is gameable. Marketers abuse reddit as well, it just isn't quite as profitable as ranking #1 on Google. If a major search engine implemented a voting model, it too would spring an entire industry of "optimizing" for rankings via upvotes.
- nwienert 6y agoIt's nothing like what Google implements. Which is easier: enforcing one account per person and then identifying bad-voters, or not doing that and having N pages, and N*M page links? Further, you'd now have direct access to customizing results per-user. Use my votes.