Live data from Hacker News

Google Memory Loss

tbray.org

501–510 of 552 posts

Re: Google Memory Loss

#501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ads? What ads? I see no ads.

I actually forgot there's ads in Google's result pages. It's been ages since I've last seen them, uBlock is the first thing extension I install on a fresh Firefox.

Yes, one tends to forget about ads ;)

Re: Google Memory Loss

#502
post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You fail CAPTCHAs and get flagged as a robot. Are you sure you're not a robot? I have the same problem. To pass Google CAPTCHA you have to perform like an average human. This is different from getting it right. Once I started being lazier, (e.g. back of a sign isn't a sign, picture that contains a storefront but in the distance doesn't contain a storefront), I have had greater success rates. It's like Google is train…

An image containing the back of the sign doesn't contain a sign. A sign is the front. The back is just a flat surface, not a sign.

But it's part of a sign and all things that are part of a sign, are signs. ;)

Re: Google Memory Loss

#503
post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You fail CAPTCHAs and get flagged as a robot. Are you sure you're not a robot? I have the same problem. To pass Google CAPTCHA you have to perform like an average human. This is different from getting it right. Once I started being lazier, (e.g. back of a sign isn't a sign, picture that contains a storefront but in the distance doesn't contain a storefront), I have had greater success rates. It's like Google is train…

An image containing the back of the sign doesn't contain a sign. A sign is the front. The back is just a flat surface, not a sign.

But it's part of a sign and all things that are part of a sign, as long as thry are attached to the sign, are signs. ;)

Re: Google Memory Loss

#504
post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? I just searched for "the furce awakens". And got: Showing results for "the force awakens" Search instead for "the furce awakens" And hitting that got me the Zootopia stuff. So?

But this is the wrong way around. At least make it an option to offer the typo correction instead of forcing it on you. Think of how much money Amazon made with one click. Two clicks is twice the clicks. Focus on fast and relevant searches not trying to guess what I meant. It's great to have a typo correction on offer but let me decide whether I want that to be default -- I don't. I know what I am searching for.

I agree that having that option would make sense. But arguably the default should be correction, because most users are probably making typos.

Re: Google Memory Loss

#505
post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this is the wrong way around. At least make it an option to offer the typo correction instead of forcing it on you. Think of how much money Amazon made with one click. Two clicks is twice the clicks. Focus on fast and relevant searches not trying to guess what I meant. It's great to have a typo correction on offer but let me decide whether I want that to be default -- I don't. I know what I am searching for.

I agree that having that option would make sense. But arguably the default should be correction, because most users are probably making typos.

Fine but I am logged in, if it were an option I could fix it once and carry on.

Re: Google Memory Loss

#506

I've noticed this many times too, particularly recently, and I call it "Google Alzheimer's" --- what was once a very powerful search engine that could give you thousands (yes, I've tried exhausting its result pages many times, and used to have much success finding the perfect site many dozens of pages deep in the results) of pages containing nothing but the exact words and phrase you search for has seemingly degraded…

> has seemingly degraded into an approximation of a search engine that has knowledge of only very superficial information, will try to rewrite your queries and omit words (including the very word that makes all the difference...) I think the biggest irony is that the web allows for more adoption of long-tail movements than ever before, and Google has gotten significantly worse at turning these up. I assume this has s…

This is [one of] the dark side[s] of the "adaptive" or "personalized" Web. The more adaptive and less deterministic, the less collaboratively and reliably useful it is, even if it happens to be better at serving attention-monster momentary gratification of the meme du jour.

The reliance on advertising revenue models means that all such Web properties morph into being essentially adversarial attention traps against users.

I would pay $50/month in a heartbeat for access to a no-ads, deterministic, guts-openened-with-API Google type engine (even if rate limited at that price to some high-human volume of usage).

Re: Google Memory Loss

#507
post #456

Many people here are pining for the old days of Google search where if you knew the operators and some tricks you could develop very specific queries and get a page that matches exactly. I remember those days too. It did feel like Google search skill was a super power. I also remember my non technical friends and family being pretty much unable to find what they were looking for online. Google did not turn their ramb…

I think you forgot how maintains computers of these non-powered users, it's us. Advanced users. When I decide Bing or DDG is better than Google Search, then Google can kiss my ass goodbye and my 20 computers I maintain occasionally for family and friends.

Re: Google Memory Loss

#508
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think part of this has to do with googles actual customer base: Adwords users. The goal of Adwords is to have every single search be worth the maximum possible value in an advertising sense. So if one person a month searches for "Office desk drawer repairman Concord California" they do not want to service that very detailed long tail search, that would minimize value for themselves and maximize it for the advertise…

You know, that actually makes a lot of sense. Recently, I attempted to bid on some long-tail keywords in AdWords for some targeted ads, but unfortunately they don’t have the “search volume” to qualify.

You mean you cannot bid on keywords with very low search volume ?

Re: Google Memory Loss

#510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has seemingly degraded into an approximation of a search engine that has knowledge of only very superficial information, will try to rewrite your queries and omit words (including the very word that makes all the difference...) I think the biggest irony is that the web allows for more adoption of long-tail movements than ever before, and Google has gotten significantly worse at turning these up. I assume this has s…

I think the biggest irony is that the web allows for more adoption of long-tail movements than ever before, and Google has gotten significantly worse at turning these up. I assume this has something to do with the fact that information from the long tail is substantially less searched for than stuff within the normal bounds. Google wants you to be mainstream now. If everyone thinks the same and wants the same things…

I see quite the opposite inceintive for Google. If you are a very eccentric individual and they know those quirks, they have a huge competitive advantage in targeting ads to you vs. some bulk radio broadcast ad etc.
Post reply on HN