6 ms·
> Tons of awful blog posts, from years ago, This. While humanity has uploaded a lot of valuable, worthwhile information online in the past decade, that's just
by mcav 17y ago
> Tons of awful blog posts, from years ago,
This. While humanity has uploaded a lot of valuable, worthwhile information online in the past decade, that's just a blip compared to the amount of totally useless junk online. That makes things harder for all search engines. It also will be interesting to see how search engines cope with the internet as the number of websites/pages continues to grow in the next fifty or so years.
- NathanKP 17y agoEventually I suppose that we will see sites such as quality directories rise again. For example, a site dedicated specifically towards programming topics with links to known high quality programming articles. In a way I cope with that problem by searching for "keyword + name of site that I trust". For example "cross domain javascript fade quirksmode". It works better that way, but it assumes that you already know the names of major "solution providers."
- philwelch 17y agoThat behavior seems popular--most queries, Google Suggest appends "wiki" or "wikipedia" to as a popular search.
- NathanKP 17y agoThat is also probably why Google usually ranks Wikipedia so highly. And that is another solution. Google can make known, trusted websites such as About.com, Wikipedia, Quirksmode, rank highly. They already do that based on domain name age and link backs, and it is part of the reason why it is so hard to rank highly when you start a new site.
- dtby 17y agoGoogle can make known, trusted websites such as About.com, Wikipedia, Quirksmode, rank highly. I thought this is what PageRank was supposed to determine algorithmically. I don't trust two out of three of your listed trusted websites, so this would devalue their service to me. Then again, they probably don't care much what I think, since I switched search engines months ago.
- ericd 17y agoYeah, I think the domain name age is a real problem, since it creates a barrier to entry for new, better stuff, and slows down the evolution of the internet. Not sure how big the weight is, but combined with 10 years of link building, it can be very hard to topple a more established but inferior site.
- zackattack 17y agoI know it makes things harder, why can't they implement a suggestion like mine? People stop searching when they find what they're looking for. Oh, wait. The more searches they do, the more impressions they see. The more impressions they see, the more likely they are to click on an ad. More ad clicks, more money.
- cma 17y agoThey aren't subject to any competition that would counteract the incentive you mentioned?
- zackattack 17y agoThey can't be too greedy, or they'll lose business to competitors. They can't be too selfless, or they won't have the resources to do incredible things. Hypothesis: Price, efficiency, benefits to the consumer all oscillate over the years, never to converge, as competition naturally enter and exit the field.
- jordyhoyt 17y agoSorry for this to get all meta, but what is the meaning of saying "this" at the beginning of a comment? I've seen it elsewhere, sometimes as the entire response. I'm afraid I missed the beginnings of this convention, and it's not intuitive (at least to me).
- steerpike 17y agoIt's a shorthand for 'I totally agree and what was said bears repeating'. I think it originated on fark, but I'm not totally sure.
- telemachos 17y agoI thought we already had a way to say that: ditto.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- carbocation 17y agoThe original post asked a question: "Why can't Google [surreptitiously?] rank search results by actual relevancy (e.g. clicks & abandons)?" The respondent felt that the original post contained the answer to its own question. Therefore, the respondent said, "This," pointing to the answer.
- jordyhoyt 17y agoOk, I see now that the original poster was effectively saying "this is why", not necessarily using the "this" meme that I was confused about. Still, I got my answer and the post has been clarified for me. Thanks, guys.
- jamesbritt 17y ago" Therefore, the respondent said, "This," pointing to the answer." Shouldn't it then be "that", or have the quote come after "this"?
- pvandehaar 17y agoI try to avoid predictions in software further ahead than 30 years. I expect search will be rather unrecognizable by then. Just think back 50 years (PDP-10 and ITS 40 years ago; Apple and Unix at 30; Linux is 15).