2 ms·
I seriously do not want anything like that in my search results. It'd be full of spam instantly. I disagree. I use google because it's clean and quick. Feature
by axod 17y ago
I seriously do not want anything like that in my search results. It'd be full of spam instantly.
I disagree. I use google because it's clean and quick. Feature creep is a sure fire way to die if you get it wrong. Sure, they should have a dedicated 'real time' search thing, like they have for blogs/news etc.
If Google do get dragged down by Bing into tit for tat features etc, it'd be a great time for a search engine startup to do what Google did at the start.
- ntoshev 17y agoWell, you can argue RT is more prone to spam because there is less (recent) data and therefore spam filtering is harder. However, with Twitter/social networks the accounts have reliable authorship/history and you can exploit that for filtering... basically rank higher the pieces of data from old accounts that didn't spam before. I wouldn't say spammers have inherent advantage for real time. Google has been pretty good in figuring out what to include in their "universal" search, I guess their quality control will notice if RT results are not useful for most people.
- waterlesscloud 17y agoYou're assuming the only value Google gets is the raw data. Does Google seem like the sort of company that stops with raw data? Or do they seem like a company that will squeeze every tiny little bit of information out of that raw data? There's MUCH more value in Twitter's firehose than the literal tweets. Google will extract it.
- axod 17y agoCan you give some examples. How does anyone know 'stephenfry' is the real Stephen Fry, and an 'authority', and not a spammer.