Live data from Hacker News

How is search so bad? A case study

svilentodorov.xyz

381–390 of 416 posts

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#381
post #7

Google has definitely stopped being able to find the things I need. Pasting stack traces and error messages. Needle in a haystack phrases from an article or book. None of it works anymore. Does this mean they are ripe for disruption or has search gotten harder?

My guess is that suppressing spammy pages got too hard. So they applied some kind of big hammer that has a high false positive rate. You're getting the best of what's left. Maybe also some quality decline in their gradual shift to less hand weighted attributes and more ML.

This! I think this is the biggest piece of the puzzling issue.

Was it Panda update or that one plus the one after - it took out so much of the web and replaced it with "better netizens" who weren't doing this bad thing or that bad thing.

Several problems with that - 1 - they took out a lot of good sites. Many good sites did things to get ranked and did things to be better once they got traffic.

The overbroad ban hammer took many down - and many people that likely paid an seo firm not knowing that seo firms were bad in google's eyes (at the time) - so lots of mom and pops and larger businesses got smacked down and put out of the internet business - just like how many blogs have shut down.

Of course local results taking a lot of search space and the instant answers (50% of searches never get a click cuz google gives them the answer right on the results page (often stolen from a site) are compounding this.

They tried having the disavow tool to make amends - but the average small business doesn't know about these things, and getting help on the webmaster forum is a joke if you are tech inclined, imagine what an experience it is for small business owners.

I miss the days of Matt Cutts warning people "get your Press Releases taken down or nofollowed or it's gonna crush you soon" - problem is most of the people who were profiting from no-longer-allowed seo techniques were not reading Matt's words.

I also appreciated his saying 'tell your users to bookmark you, they may not find you in google results soon' - yeah, at least we were warned about it.

The web has not been the same since those updates, and it's gotten worse since. This does help adwords sell and the big companies that can afford them though.

In these ways google has been kind of like the walmart of the internet, coming in, taking out small businesses, taking what works from one place and making it cheap at their place.

I'd much rather have the results of pre-penguin and let the surfers decide by choosing to remain on a site that may be good that also had press releases and blog links... rather than loosing all the sites that had links on blogs. I am betting most of the users out there would prefer the results of days past as well.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#382
post #240

This should probably be a separate submission but why is search so bad everywhere? - Confluence: Native search is horrible IME - Microsoft Help (Applications): .chm files Need I say more. - Microsoft Task Bar: Native search okay and then horrible beyond a few key words and then ... BING :-( - Microsoft File Search: Even with full disk indexing (I turned it on) it still takes 15-20 minutes to find all jpegs with an SS…

Anything Microsoft other than Office+outlook sucks. I don't know about azure though as I have not endured it yet. Adobe wants to have you by your balls the moment you install their installer :-) I keep a separate computer for Adobe stuff just for that reason. Actually to run some MS junk too. >Seriously though with all the interview code tests bubble sort, quick sort, bloom filters, etc. Why can't companies or even w…

I envy your luck if you think office and outlook don't suck! Performance and reliability is terrible from my experience.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#383
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds extremely implausible; especially claiming "immune to SEO" is like declaring encryption "unbreakable". A lot of human effort would be devoted to it if your engine became popular.

How to be immune to SEO? Easy once see how. More details are in my now old HN post at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12404641 For a short answer, SEO has to do with keywords. My startup has nothing to do with keywords or even the English language at all. In particular, I'm not parsing the English language or any natural language; I'm not using natural language understanding techniques. In particular, my Web pag…

> Really, what people want is content with some meaning they have at least roughly in mind

Yes, but capturing meaning mathematically is somewhat an unsolved problem in both mathematics, linguistics and semiotics. Your post claims you have some mathematics but (obviously as it's a secret) doesn't explain what.

SEO currently relies on keywords, but SEO as a practice is humans learning. There is a feedback loop between "write page", "user types string into search engine" and "page appears at certain rank in search listing". Humans are going to iteratively mutate their content and see where it appears in the listing. That will produce a set of techniques that are observed to increase the ranking.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the contrary, according to relatively recent Pew numbers from 2018 [1], around ~38% of American's identify as independents, with ~%31 democrat and ~%26 republican. That's not “on the contrary”; 38% Heck, even 43% (the number that don't identify as either Republicans or Democrats) is less than 50%; most Americans specifically identify as either Democrats or Republicans. > but independents are much more important…

You got me in a technically correct way, which is as they say, the best kind of correct. I think the keyword "majority" being defined as more than %50 being the crux, so I should have worded my statement better with a "most", "plurality" or "relative majority" instead. > most Americans specifically identify as either Democrats or Republicans Now you just did the same thing I did but in reverse! See my comments about…

> Now you just did the same thing I did but in reverse!

No, I didn't.

> See my comments about more specific words for plurality such as "most".

“Most” (as an adjective applied to a group) is for a majority, not a plurality, but that's okay, because 57% is an absolute majority, anyway, which is why my reference, which did use “most” for a majority, was not what you did.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#385
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, number 3 really pisses me off recently. If I type in 3 words I would like to search by those 3 words. What ends up happening is Google just decides that it's too much of a hassle or that I've made a mistake and just searches using 2. So now I have to input all the words in quotes so that it works like it supposed to in the first place. This functionallity literaly never helped me during search. Not once.

"try" "putting" "the" "words" "in" "respective" "quotes" "like" "this"

That's what I'm doing, sorry it wasn't clear ;)

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#386
post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How to be immune to SEO? Easy once see how. More details are in my now old HN post at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12404641 For a short answer, SEO has to do with keywords. My startup has nothing to do with keywords or even the English language at all. In particular, I'm not parsing the English language or any natural language; I'm not using natural language understanding techniques. In particular, my Web pag…

> Really, what people want is content with some meaning they have at least roughly in mind Yes, but capturing meaning mathematically is somewhat an unsolved problem in both mathematics, linguistics and semiotics. Your post claims you have some mathematics but (obviously as it's a secret) doesn't explain what. SEO currently relies on keywords, but SEO as a practice is humans learning. There is a feedback loop between…

> Yes, but capturing meaning mathematically is somewhat an unsolved problem in both mathematics, linguistics and semiotics.

I've been successful via my search math. For your claim, as far as I know, you are correct, but actually that does not make my search engine and its math impossible.

> That will produce a set of techniques that are observed to increase the ranking.

Ranking? I can't resist, to borrow from one of the most famous scenes in all of movies: "Ranking? What ranking? We don't need no stink'n ranking".

Nowhere in my search engine is anything like a ranking.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#387
post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Really, what people want is content with some meaning they have at least roughly in mind Yes, but capturing meaning mathematically is somewhat an unsolved problem in both mathematics, linguistics and semiotics. Your post claims you have some mathematics but (obviously as it's a secret) doesn't explain what. SEO currently relies on keywords, but SEO as a practice is humans learning. There is a feedback loop between…

> Yes, but capturing meaning mathematically is somewhat an unsolved problem in both mathematics, linguistics and semiotics. I've been successful via my search math. For your claim, as far as I know, you are correct, but actually that does not make my search engine and its math impossible. > That will produce a set of techniques that are observed to increase the ranking. Ranking? I can't resist, to borrow from one of…

So, do you only ever display one single result? Or do you display multiple results? Because if you display multiple results, they will be in a textual order, whether that's top to bottom or left to right, and that is a ranking.

People pay tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to move their result from #2 to #1 in the list of Google results.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#388
post #172

I've been thinking about this for years[1]. The truth is, what Google solved was parsing the search query, not identifying the best results. In fact, Google is not incentivized to give you the best results, they are designed to maximize their revenue, derived from getting you to view / click ads. Google is not a search company, they are an advertising company. The more searches you make, the more revenue they make. T…

Is it time for paid search engines? Make users vote with their wallets and pay for the eternal arms race. Problem is, whoever is behind something like that would have to start with an already sufficiently superior experience (or massive geek cred) to make people pay from the early days. Maybe going back to manually curated results of a subset of topics would work? Or some Stack Overflow-esque model of user powered me…

No. Just because you pay for something doesn't mean you aren't also the product. The other ideas are specifically ones which failed. It didn't even work that well in the 90s. User metadata isn't even a solution in itself but an optimization layer at best.

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real reason why search is so bad is that Google is downranking the internet. I should know - I blew the whistle on the whole censorship regime and walked 950 pages to the DOJ and media outlets. --> zachvorhies.com What did I disclose? That Google was using a project called "Machine Learning Faireness" to rerank the entire internet. Part of this beast has to do with a secret Page Rank score that Google's army of w…

Google's search rankings are based on opinions held by other credible sources. This isn't really blowing the whistle when, as you admitted, Google admits this openly. And maybe your site doesn't get ranked well because it's directly tied to project veritas. I don't like being too political, especially on hn and on an account tied to my real identity, but project veritas and it's associates exhibit appalling behavior…

Meta-comment, but this is partly why search and the internet is so bad now; there are a large number of political disinformation campaigns which are getting increasingly blatant, and getting better at finding believers on the internet.

People have a vested interest in destroying the idea that anything can be a non-partisan "fact". Anything can become a smear. Only the most absolutely egregious ones can be reined in by legal action (e.g. Alex Jones libelling the Sandy Hook parents).

(This is not just internet, of course; the British press mendacity towards the Royal family is playing out at the moment.)

Re: How is search so bad? A case study

#390
post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything Microsoft other than Office+outlook sucks. I don't know about azure though as I have not endured it yet. Adobe wants to have you by your balls the moment you install their installer :-) I keep a separate computer for Adobe stuff just for that reason. Actually to run some MS junk too. >Seriously though with all the interview code tests bubble sort, quick sort, bloom filters, etc. Why can't companies or even w…

I envy your luck if you think office and outlook don't suck! Performance and reliability is terrible from my experience.

Performance and reliability is indeed terrible. It is a mystery that a word processor crashes so often and take 10s of seconds just to quit. But the fact is that they get the job done and I haven't seen any decent alternatives to word, excel and for that matter even outlook. If you know something reasonably close, then please share.
Post reply on HN