4 ms·

Googles mistake besides giving ads relevant to them and not what the user searched for is that they indexed everything (although not onion sites or anything lik

Googles mistake besides giving ads relevant to them and not what the user searched for is that they indexed everything (although not onion sites or anything like that) so the issue is garbage in, garbage out. A new search engine would just drop the top x sites from its index, and be aggressive with dropping sites. Blog spam? Link farm? Quora? Pinterest? Wikihow? Don't index them at all. A Shitty wordpress site that's just copying stuff verbatim from other sites? Drop them. Over engineered SEO? News sites? Fake news? Satire sites? Don't bother with them etc. (or maybe put a clear disclaimer in the case of satire sites) Make search about what it's supposed to be, discoverability. There are so many golden sites out there to be discovered under the absolute cruft Google and the like bury us in. And the new 'you.com' isn't any better because they're just getting their results from Bing, and they've been caught taking their results from Google!

1270018080 5y ago
There should be a browser extension that completely removes any reference to Pinterest. Like it never existed.
- 0des 5y ago
  "Unpinterested!", if you use Chrome - https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/unpinterested/gefaihkenmchjmcpcbpdijpoknfjpbfe https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/unpinterested/gefa... "Unpinterested!", if you use Firefox - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/unpinterested/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/unpinterested...
endisneigh 5y ago
What you're describing isn't really that simple. Let's say you only take the top 200 to 500 sites, for example. For one, these top 200 to 500 are always changing. Suppose you keep them static. The sort of things like "spam", "fake news" and so forth are highly opinionated categories. Even if you know objectively that a site is spam, it's possible that it contains the information the user is looking for. Ultimately it would devolve to full curation, which has been tried and doesn't really work to the extent necessary to justify its own existence.

1270018080 5y ago

There should be a browser extension that completely removes any reference to Pinterest. Like it never existed.

0des 5y ago
"Unpinterested!", if you use Chrome - https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/unpinterested/gefaihkenmchjmcpcbpdijpoknfjpbfe https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/unpinterested/gefa... "Unpinterested!", if you use Firefox - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/unpinterested/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/unpinterested...

endisneigh 5y ago

What you're describing isn't really that simple. Let's say you only take the top 200 to 500 sites, for example. For one, these top 200 to 500 are always changing. Suppose you keep them static. The sort of things like "spam", "fake news" and so forth are highly opinionated categories. Even if you know objectively that a site is spam, it's possible that it contains the information the user is looking for. Ultimately it would devolve to full curation, which has been tried and doesn't really work to the extent necessary to justify its own existence.