I think it would be helpful to remember to distinguish two separate search engine concepts here: indexing and ranking. Indexing isn't the source of problems. You can index in an objective manner. A new architecture for the web doesn't need to eliminate indexing. Ranking is where it gets controversial. When you rank, you pick winners and losers. Hopefully based on some useful metric, but the devil is in the details on…
Spitballing here, but what if instead of a monolithic page rank algorithm, you could combine individually maintained, open set rankings? ===Edit=== I mean to say you as the user would gain control over the ranking sources, the company operating this search service would perform the aggregation and effectively operate marketplace of ranking providers. ===end edit=== For example, one could be an index of "canonical" si…
Ask HN: Can we create a new internet where search engines are irrelevant?
391–395 of 395 posts
Re: Ask HN: Can we create a new internet where search engines are irrelevant?
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know how google search results can get really useless just a few pages in? And it says it found something crazy like 880,000 results? Imagine randomizing that. --- Unrelated I searched for "Penguin exhibits in Michigan". Of which we have several. It reports 880,000 results but I can only go to page 12 (after telling it to show omitted results). Interesting... https://www.google.com/search?q=penguin+exhibits+in+mi…
I heard that they also filter results by some undisclosed parameters, like they don't show you anything that hasn't been modified in the last ~10 years, no matter how hard you try
Re: Ask HN: Can we create a new internet where search engines are irrelevant?
#393I think it would be helpful to remember to distinguish two separate search engine concepts here: indexing and ranking. Indexing isn't the source of problems. You can index in an objective manner. A new architecture for the web doesn't need to eliminate indexing. Ranking is where it gets controversial. When you rank, you pick winners and losers. Hopefully based on some useful metric, but the devil is in the details on…
...To which people responded with various schemes for fair ranking systems.
...To which people observed that someone will always try to game the ranking systems.
Yep! So long as somebody stands to benefit (profit) from artificially high rankings, they'll aim for that, and try to break the system. Those with more resources will be better able to game the system, and gain more resources... ad nauseam. We'd end up right where we are.
The only way to break that [feedback loop](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=thinking+in+systems+meadows) is to disassociate profit from rank.
Say it with me: we need a global, non-commercial network of networks--an internet, if you will. (Insert Al Gore reference here.)
(Note: I don't have time to read all the comments on this page before my `noprocrast` times out, so please pardon me if somebody already said this.)
Re: Ask HN: Can we create a new internet where search engines are irrelevant?
#394Re: Ask HN: Can we create a new internet where search engines are irrelevant?
#395I think it would be helpful to remember to distinguish two separate search engine concepts here: indexing and ranking. Indexing isn't the source of problems. You can index in an objective manner. A new architecture for the web doesn't need to eliminate indexing. Ranking is where it gets controversial. When you rank, you pick winners and losers. Hopefully based on some useful metric, but the devil is in the details on…
How about open sourcing the ranking and then allowing people to customize it. I should be able to rank my own search results how I want to without much technical knowledge. I want to rank my results by what is most popular to my friends (Facebook or otherwise) so I just look for a search engine extension that allows me to do that. This could get complex but can also be simple if novices just use the most popular rank…