6 ms·

I remember when you could query Google for x and it would simply say it didn't have any results for x. It was such a great feeling to get a frank, honest reply

I remember when you could query Google for x and it would simply say it didn't have any results for x. It was such a great feeling to get a frank, honest reply instead of being bullshitted with results that didn't have x in then.

mynameishere 3y ago
My favorite is when you fight and fight and fight, looking for something and then you finally manage to narrow the results down to what you wanted, and it says (right above the correct result): "It looks like there aren't many great matches for your search" Good job, Goog! I remember when it was new, and one of the killer features was the dead-simple "innovation" of having AND searches instead of OR. To this day, I think that any search engine that queried based upon the exact provided search terms would eat their lunch. Probably not, but I would like it.
- bombcar 3y ago
  Google search is optimized to deliver more ads. Providing the result you want quickly is against this.
- pixl97 3y ago
  I'm not sure how the search engine you suggest would filter out noise. There is just an ocean of generated content that exists out there filled with just about every string you could imagine that attempts to get you to click on a link so they can show an ad. The modern internet is full of hot garbage.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - mindslight 3y ago
    Any page with ads, remove it from the results. I'm not saying this would in any way be in Google's interest, but I'd love to see a search engine that did this.
    - Gracana 3y ago
      That is a fantastic idea.
  - cgriswald 3y ago
    > I'm not sure how the search engine you suggest would filter out noise. This seems orthogonal to the suggestion. Presumably the search engine would still filter out noise. However, even if the other poster means they want the raw internet as well, there's no technical limitations preventing search engines from offering a 'filtered' or 'raw' option. They already offer filters based on what you're looking for (books, news) or to exclude explicit results.
- justinclift 3y ago
  > I think that any search engine that queried based upon the exact provided search terms would eat their lunch. Kagi is probably what you're looking for then. :) https://kagi.com https://kagi.com
hackernewds 3y ago
Would you rather have "There are no results for Hurricane Karina" than "Here are results for Hurricane Katrina"? Honestly..
- flutas 3y ago
  I'd rather have "no results for 'hurricane Karina' did you mean 'Hurricane Katrina'?" If you assume something ("oh they meant X not Y", then when your assumption is wrong you (Google) just look stupid.
  - dotcoma 3y ago
    Or in bad faith.
  - xnx 3y ago
    It's also a fair perspective to have "If Google knew what I meant, why didn't they just show me those results and save me the click?"
    - WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
      Because Google doesn't know that I think, it's an an unfair perspective to pretend/assume it does. When it acts as if I'm wrong, it's wrong.
      - joshuamorton 3y ago
        Are you open to the idea that most people disagree with you and prefer a system that does do these things?
        pharrington 3y ago
        In that case, have the fuzzy search be the default, and have an option to opt out of fuzzy search. The current state of Google search is always use fuzzy search - it cannot be disabled anymore. Even clicking the "No results found for X, did you mean Y" link submits a new fuzzy search query with Y.
0xdada 3y ago
This happened to me yesterday, I don't remember the query but I remember I was quite surprised because it never happens. Turns out I misspelled a brand/product name by one letter - Funny enough, I would have wanted them to correct my query in this case.
crazygringo 3y ago
What do you mean, you remember? It still does that now if you put your search terms in quotes.

mynameishere 3y ago

My favorite is when you fight and fight and fight, looking for something and then you finally manage to narrow the results down to what you wanted, and it says (right above the correct result): "It looks like there aren't many great matches for your search" Good job, Goog! I remember when it was new, and one of the killer features was the dead-simple "innovation" of having AND searches instead of OR. To this day, I think that any search engine that queried based upon the exact provided search terms would eat their lunch. Probably not, but I would like it.

bombcar 3y ago
Google search is optimized to deliver more ads. Providing the result you want quickly is against this.
pixl97 3y ago
I'm not sure how the search engine you suggest would filter out noise. There is just an ocean of generated content that exists out there filled with just about every string you could imagine that attempts to get you to click on a link so they can show an ad. The modern internet is full of hot garbage.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- mindslight 3y ago
  Any page with ads, remove it from the results. I'm not saying this would in any way be in Google's interest, but I'd love to see a search engine that did this.
  - Gracana 3y ago
    That is a fantastic idea.
- cgriswald 3y ago
  > I'm not sure how the search engine you suggest would filter out noise. This seems orthogonal to the suggestion. Presumably the search engine would still filter out noise. However, even if the other poster means they want the raw internet as well, there's no technical limitations preventing search engines from offering a 'filtered' or 'raw' option. They already offer filters based on what you're looking for (books, news) or to exclude explicit results.
justinclift 3y ago
> I think that any search engine that queried based upon the exact provided search terms would eat their lunch. Kagi is probably what you're looking for then. :) https://kagi.com https://kagi.com

hackernewds 3y ago

Would you rather have "There are no results for Hurricane Karina" than "Here are results for Hurricane Katrina"? Honestly..

flutas 3y ago
I'd rather have "no results for 'hurricane Karina' did you mean 'Hurricane Katrina'?" If you assume something ("oh they meant X not Y", then when your assumption is wrong you (Google) just look stupid.
- dotcoma 3y ago
  Or in bad faith.
- xnx 3y ago
  It's also a fair perspective to have "If Google knew what I meant, why didn't they just show me those results and save me the click?"
  - WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
    Because Google doesn't know that I think, it's an an unfair perspective to pretend/assume it does. When it acts as if I'm wrong, it's wrong.
    - joshuamorton 3y ago
      Are you open to the idea that most people disagree with you and prefer a system that does do these things?
      - pharrington 3y ago
        In that case, have the fuzzy search be the default, and have an option to opt out of fuzzy search. The current state of Google search is always use fuzzy search - it cannot be disabled anymore. Even clicking the "No results found for X, did you mean Y" link submits a new fuzzy search query with Y.

0xdada 3y ago

This happened to me yesterday, I don't remember the query but I remember I was quite surprised because it never happens. Turns out I misspelled a brand/product name by one letter - Funny enough, I would have wanted them to correct my query in this case.

crazygringo 3y ago

What do you mean, you remember? It still does that now if you put your search terms in quotes.