|
|
Yup - Google's a charitable foundation. You, of course, send regular donations to keep it up and running.
Sure it puts advertisers first - they're the ones who pay for Google.
(Also why the EU isn't worthy of sucking a monkey's (kss) for trying to über-fine Google for doing what it's always done and never kept a secret.
Nothing's free. Drink the Kool-Aide or brew your own. Nothing new here.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly what I meant. The consequence is that the search results are optimized towards more $$$ for Google, not to be more helpful for the user. Only the OP seems to be surprised by this.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
It's actually enlightened self interest on Google part. In order to maximize profits they need to maximize use. In order to maximize use they need to get the best possible responses and yet display the most relevant paid results. Ideally so relevant that users actually click-through.
That's why they keep their ranking algorithms secret - the idea is to decide for themselves the balance with minimal interference from junk like link-farms and such.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed it too. Then I was (and still am) forced to use Bing for 5 years... Not even the worst Google can match the best Bing in crappiness.
DURA LEX, SED LEX
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
When I was six, there were no ones and zeroes - only zeroes. And not all of them worked. -- Ravi Bhavnani
|
|
|
|
|
For me google has degraded to the point where even webcrawler is better.
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: was (and still am) forced to use Bing
Why? How?
I sometimes use something called ixquick - basically it's mostly add filtered google with privacy built in, but it also lacks suggestions. (Also doesn't always match google results, but it's refreshing having a search engine just return search results.)
Sadly MS have broken bing just like every other product, with only the exceptions:
1. VS (excluding the installer which still auto installs without asking some extra crap), and,
2. SS (been a long while but I believe the DB is still OK, no idea if they broke the tools office though.)
- but SS still a problem, somehow SS needs 387 things installed messing up the installed programs list, and wtf depends on what? Also needs around 236 processes running full time. I don't get that, mysql maybe lags a bit but needs only 1 installation and 1 process - easy to manage, easy to clean up.
Sin tack ear lol
Pressing the any key may be continuate
modified 9-Jan-17 7:16am.
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: Why? How?
How: Google is not reachable from our network. Only a few MS sites and, after years of requests, CP and StackOverflow (due to the fact that MSDN, our only approved source of documentation, refers to these sites in its results).
Why: because our management comes from the era of manual labour in the fields and manages a software house precisely in the same way, even calling programmers "the software labourers". Don't expect any grain of salt in their brains, ever.
DURA LEX, SED LEX
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
When I was six, there were no ones and zeroes - only zeroes. And not all of them worked. -- Ravi Bhavnani
|
|
|
|
|
On the contrary it is very rare for Google not to find me exactly what I search for.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd have to agree - it works well for me (unlike Bing which couldn't find it's own ass with both hands and a map).
In fact, it seems to get better each time I use it - possibly it's the heuristics on previous searches making results more relevant, I don't know.
Perhaps the OP's problems are the things he searches for, rather than the results he gets... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Just IT stuff. It used to be very good at that.
I find I am having to put words in quotes to force them into the search, its getting very annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
Well if you search for THAT, what do you expect! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
*smut* 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same here, but I stopped using them because I got sick of all the requests for personal information, the nagging demands that I read the twice-weekly "policy updates", the incessant insistence that I downgrade to a browser I don't like, etc.
If I want to talk to a buddy, I'll talk to a buddy. From a search engine, I only want search results.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try using it without having already giving them ownership of your life (e.g. without logging in to google+, youtube, etc).
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: Has anyone noticed in the last few years that it has become utter crap?
No, on the contrary. I find that google is incredibly good. 
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
I find it very sensitive to phrasing.
And as I said it only seems ot pay attention to the first few words, put in 6 and the last three are ignored IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure about past few years, but lately the way it searches has definitely changed.
I have noticed basically two things.
1. Previously it was matching all words to find a good match, so if you type required words in random order, it used to find links that may be a hit. NOW, it seem to matching with sentence and also applying some kind AI to infer what you are trying to search for.
2. Second, through my previous searches, it tries to find related link for this search.
The first point is something I am not liking. As previously, I just have to type technical words for which I am facing problem and it gets all CP/SO links that contains those words. Now due to it's intelligence applied, I have to make sure the search phrase I type makes some sense, else it doesn't find good links.
That's my opinion though !
Thanks,
Milind
|
|
|
|
|
MT_ wrote: As previously, I just have to type technical words for which I am facing problem and it gets all CP/SO links that contains those words. Now due to it's intelligence applied, I have to make sure the search phrase I type makes some sense, else it doesn't find good links.
Yep, exactly that. It no longer searches on a load of technical words they have to be in a phrase google can understand, and get that wrong, and its useless.
|
|
|
|
|
What are you going to use instead?
I haven't noticed any difference. What exactly does it ignore? I did notice that it favors certain sites (like SO) and fails to block obnoxious scum sites (you know the type, the ones who hijack search results with fake hits) but other than that it beats the competition.
|
|
|
|
|
As I said if you put in a load of words, only the first few are used in the search, and phrase a question badly, and the results are useless.
What else to use? DuckDuckGo, its good, and isnt spyware.
|
|
|
|
|
Use verbatim mode. It seems to give the same quality results as early google. There is a Chrome plugin to enable it all the time. Or you can click on 'Tools' -> 'Verbatim', but you can only get there after you search once.
(Couldn't stand their results until I figured that out. Very friggin' annoying to have to search the search results!)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
