6 ms·
or it could, I don't know, maybe search on closest matches to locations containing the words "Sambisa" and "forest" with priority to those areas containing the
by SeanDav 12y ago
or it could, I don't know, maybe search on closest matches to locations containing the words "Sambisa" and "forest" with priority to those areas containing the words in the correct order - like maybe "Sambisa Forest Reserve".
Oooh maybe they can take out a patent on that idea first...
(Sorry OP, not having a go at you - just getting incredibly frustrated with companies I used to love and respect - like Google and Amazon.)
- judk 12y agoAmazing they hadn't thought of that, or believed it caused too many false positives. You should go in for Director of Search to straighten them out.
- pjscott 12y agoThat sounds way too obvious for them not to have tried on a large corpus of (search string, correct result) pairs. If it actually gave better results, do you really think they wouldn't do it? I understand wanting to vent about the magic not being magical enough, but just how stupid do you think they are?
- TillE 12y agoGoogle has a bad habit of trying to be too clever. For a very long time, searching for "yore" (an English word) on the Google Play store only gave me results for "your", without even bothering to tell me what it was doing. Google is very concerned about giving users what it thinks they want, rather then what they actually asked for. Sometimes that's great (I love basic stemming), sometimes it fills my results with irrelevant garbage.