4 ms·

the ranking algorithm is going to need to be decentralized (aka user-configurable) in some way What do you mean? What configuration options would you like?

by p1esk 5y ago

celdon25 5y ago
Okay, one example: Suppose you're a gamer - You could configure search results related to gaming to be limited to games you own, games you want, the subset of platforms or genres you care about, games your friends own, and so on. It wouldn't be a priority for most search companies to make something like that, but it would certainly provide some value for certain people. Decentralized configuration would allow for communities with given interests to configure and distribute customizations for that audience, in a way that would appeal to that audience. It's not that farfetched of an idea, very realistic both from a tech and adoption POV. You.com is starting the building blocks of such a thing, but I don't know how far they're going to push the envelope. https://about.you.com/apps/ https://about.you.com/apps/
- JSONderulo 5y ago
  I've been pretty stoked on you.com so far. I do like the ability to pick my search sources (apps). It would be cool to see search results for different genres/communities.
  - brentadamson 5y ago
    `see search results for different genres/communities` Can you elaborate?
    - JSONderulo 5y ago
      I just like and agree with conceptually Nuzzerino's idea above. "Decentralized configuration would allow for communities with given interests to configure and distribute customizations for that audience, in a way that would appeal to that audience."
      - brentadamson 5y ago
        Couldn’t the user just use a !bang for that?
faitswulff 5y ago
I think 99.9% of users would hate to have to configure their search results.
- celdon25 5y ago
  From parent comment: > This configuration would also need to be sharable, maybe something akin to an App Store, because not all users can be asked to be technical enough to configure everything.
  - faitswulff 5y ago
    That's still configuration. Sharing a config? Asking a friend for the best search algorithm? Most users are accustomed to just typing in their search query into random input fields and getting perfectly serviceable results.
    - celdon25 5y ago
      They're free to keep using Google if they want. My grandmother preferred AOL for many years after its prime. No shame in that. Or, as with any other software, there's this thing called a default, which usually works for the average user.
- x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
  The Google hate is so thick that people don't even think about what a Google competitor or replacement (that isn't Google rebranded) looks like. No user is looking to pass around configuration file, or have discoverability issues because they haven't joined the right community that has what they are looking for. People want an omnibox that takes them to what they are looking for, even if they don't know what that is, full stop. Needing to essentially have a Makefile to find out "Who is the main actor in Spider-Man" is dead on arrival.
  - mgkimsal 5y ago
    Absolutely no need to provide a makefile. But... there can be multiple selectable algorithms for people to choose from, and eventually some ways to configure those to your needs. Having results come up that are also explicitly labelled "You are viewing results through the FOOBAR lens - click here to use another lens". Our results are already skewed by factors that we don't have much visibility in to - being more explicit/transparent about it, while giving people some ability to influence/change the lens they view results through would be useful.

the ranking algorithm is going to need to be decentralized (aka user-configurable) in some way What do you mean? What configuration options would you like?

by p1esk 5y ago

the ranking algorithm is going to need to be decentralized (aka user-configurable) in some way What do you mean? What configuration options would you like?

celdon25 5y ago

Okay, one example: Suppose you're a gamer - You could configure search results related to gaming to be limited to games you own, games you want, the subset of platforms or genres you care about, games your friends own, and so on. It wouldn't be a priority for most search companies to make something like that, but it would certainly provide some value for certain people. Decentralized configuration would allow for communities with given interests to configure and distribute customizations for that audience, in a way that would appeal to that audience. It's not that farfetched of an idea, very realistic both from a tech and adoption POV. You.com is starting the building blocks of such a thing, but I don't know how far they're going to push the envelope. https://about.you.com/apps/ https://about.you.com/apps/

JSONderulo 5y ago
I've been pretty stoked on you.com so far. I do like the ability to pick my search sources (apps). It would be cool to see search results for different genres/communities.
- brentadamson 5y ago
  `see search results for different genres/communities` Can you elaborate?
  - JSONderulo 5y ago
    I just like and agree with conceptually Nuzzerino's idea above. "Decentralized configuration would allow for communities with given interests to configure and distribute customizations for that audience, in a way that would appeal to that audience."
    - brentadamson 5y ago
      Couldn’t the user just use a !bang for that?

faitswulff 5y ago

I think 99.9% of users would hate to have to configure their search results.

celdon25 5y ago
From parent comment: > This configuration would also need to be sharable, maybe something akin to an App Store, because not all users can be asked to be technical enough to configure everything.
- faitswulff 5y ago
  That's still configuration. Sharing a config? Asking a friend for the best search algorithm? Most users are accustomed to just typing in their search query into random input fields and getting perfectly serviceable results.
  - celdon25 5y ago
    They're free to keep using Google if they want. My grandmother preferred AOL for many years after its prime. No shame in that. Or, as with any other software, there's this thing called a default, which usually works for the average user.
x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
The Google hate is so thick that people don't even think about what a Google competitor or replacement (that isn't Google rebranded) looks like. No user is looking to pass around configuration file, or have discoverability issues because they haven't joined the right community that has what they are looking for. People want an omnibox that takes them to what they are looking for, even if they don't know what that is, full stop. Needing to essentially have a Makefile to find out "Who is the main actor in Spider-Man" is dead on arrival.
- mgkimsal 5y ago
  Absolutely no need to provide a makefile. But... there can be multiple selectable algorithms for people to choose from, and eventually some ways to configure those to your needs. Having results come up that are also explicitly labelled "You are viewing results through the FOOBAR lens - click here to use another lens". Our results are already skewed by factors that we don't have much visibility in to - being more explicit/transparent about it, while giving people some ability to influence/change the lens they view results through would be useful.