3 ms·

Too fancy. I want a simple search. . Only curated websites (period) and databases. . Only the explicit search terms I give. . Ability to block certain expli

Too fancy. I want a simple search. . Only curated websites (period) and databases. . Only the explicit search terms I give. . Ability to block certain explicit search terms. . Perhaps a bit of misspelling support. Google search's uselessness (is that a word?) increases day by day as it evolves increasingly towards marketing, 'things it thinks I mean', defaulting to wikipedia.

Scoundreller 5y ago
> defaulting to wikipedia. And here I'm complaining when they stop doing that. Try a search for coronavirus and Google has hardcoded "official" results about COVID-19 (which is just one of many coronaviruses). https://www.google.com/search?q=coronavirus https://www.google.com/search?q=coronavirus
- kingsuper20 5y ago
  One thing I tried was a search along the lines of coronavirus site:wikipedia.com site:cdc.gov well now, that doesn't work at all. So much for thinking you could send a thousand websites along with the search. I wonder sometimes, and this would probably only suit me, if I could get a copy of the websites I'm actually interested in and simply have a local copy. Do local organization and search (is that FOSS or buyable?). Maybe with occasional updates. A person could go a long way with a stack of disk drives holding libgen, sci-hub, gutenberg, magazine archives from archive.org, special interest forums, etc. Plus, it would keep you away from the less useful parts of the internet. One thing that does make you appreciate Google is how awful Amazon search is.
  - joshmarlow 5y ago
    Apparently torrenting sci-hub is a thing right now https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/nc27fv/rescue_mission_for_scihub_and_open_science_we_are/ https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/nc27fv/rescue_...
  - biofox 5y ago
    Search was a solved problem a decade ago. How did we end up losing so much functionality? Was there a specific event that started this?
  - Flenser 5y ago
    Try: coronavirus (site:wikipedia.com OR site:cdc.gov)

Scoundreller 5y ago

> defaulting to wikipedia. And here I'm complaining when they stop doing that. Try a search for coronavirus and Google has hardcoded "official" results about COVID-19 (which is just one of many coronaviruses). https://www.google.com/search?q=coronavirus https://www.google.com/search?q=coronavirus

kingsuper20 5y ago
One thing I tried was a search along the lines of coronavirus site:wikipedia.com site:cdc.gov well now, that doesn't work at all. So much for thinking you could send a thousand websites along with the search. I wonder sometimes, and this would probably only suit me, if I could get a copy of the websites I'm actually interested in and simply have a local copy. Do local organization and search (is that FOSS or buyable?). Maybe with occasional updates. A person could go a long way with a stack of disk drives holding libgen, sci-hub, gutenberg, magazine archives from archive.org, special interest forums, etc. Plus, it would keep you away from the less useful parts of the internet. One thing that does make you appreciate Google is how awful Amazon search is.
- joshmarlow 5y ago
  Apparently torrenting sci-hub is a thing right now https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/nc27fv/rescue_mission_for_scihub_and_open_science_we_are/ https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/nc27fv/rescue_...
- biofox 5y ago
  Search was a solved problem a decade ago. How did we end up losing so much functionality? Was there a specific event that started this?
- Flenser 5y ago
  Try: coronavirus (site:wikipedia.com OR site:cdc.gov)