11–20 of 140 posts
Bangs are cool but i don't think one can remember many bangs.
This site is also very good. But, it's unfortunately not much use to me as i would directly search the term with 'site:' during the time i would take to search for specific bang.
Also, if i wanted to search specific site, i would add it in search engines of my browser.
Heck yeah! Some ideas for ya: 1) We can ctrl-f to search obv, but add a filter up top that just fuzzies anything matching 2) Let me condense the header of a category, like how comments can hide their children in here 3) Both of the links in an entry go to the same thing, ala: `discworld` and `!discworld` can be clicked to do the same thing, populate the box up top, which _does_ let you click & press return. But it mi…
How many bangs do you really remember ? Bangs are cool but i don't think one can remember many bangs. This site is also very good. But, it's unfortunately not much use to me as i would directly search the term with 'site:' during the time i would take to search for specific bang. Also, if i wanted to search specific site, i would add it in search engines of my browser.
Plus, most people tend to spend most of their time on just a few sites. Knowing one or two bangs is useful enough.
DDG at this writing advertises 13,564 bangs: https://duckduckgo.com/bang?q=
This page, as with the Show HN, groups bangs by category (Entertainment Multimedia News Online Services Research Shopping Tech Translation).
There is a search feature (match on bang or URL) as well, with, of course, its own bang: !bang
In my experience, it's possible to, very roughly, define bounds to search results and usefulness or approach:
- 0 results is the null set. Obvious but worth noting.
- 1 result is an identity. That is, a search returning precisely one entity identifies that entity. (This relationship may not be persistent over time).
- To 10 results is a near universally useful set. SERPs, news sites, and many other interfaces focus on this scale. Ontologies typically branch to about 2-30 items. HN's front page lists 30 items. The Presidential Daily Brief runs about ten items. This apparently taxes the attention of some incumbents.
- To 100 results remains tractable to the determined user. This means a capacity to identify specific item(s) of interest without necessarily resorting to recordkeeping. More detailed news sites might include as many articles. A print newspaper typically runs 100-250 individual stories per day.
- To 1,000 results is methodologically tractable, though some recording and filtering system is all but certainly required. These need not be programmatic or algorithmic though often are. News wires (AP, AFP, Reuters, UPI) typically run 1,000--5,000 items/day.
- To 1,000,000 results, jumping a few orders of magnitude, typically requires some technical searching or sorting capacity. Again, not necessarily algorithmic (a large print library collection of a million or more volumes can be managed through paper based systems, though seldom is now, and requires extensive structure of stacks, index, circulation, and reshelving).
- To ~1 billion items is all but certainly programmatic.
- Greater thaan a trilliion items enters the realm of probabalistic matches, relevance, and AI.
I'm not aware of specific research in this area but would be quite interested in references.
The classification would suggest bang search rather than comprehensive listing as being of interest to most peoople though.
Sources: Seveeral of the values above are discussed here:
https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/6c220n/media_a...
https://old.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/7qya12/informa...
How many bangs do you really remember ? Bangs are cool but i don't think one can remember many bangs. This site is also very good. But, it's unfortunately not much use to me as i would directly search the term with 'site:' during the time i would take to search for specific bang. Also, if i wanted to search specific site, i would add it in search engines of my browser.
How many bangs do you really remember ? Bangs are cool but i don't think one can remember many bangs. This site is also very good. But, it's unfortunately not much use to me as i would directly search the term with 'site:' during the time i would take to search for specific bang. Also, if i wanted to search specific site, i would add it in search engines of my browser.
For many sites, you can probably just guess the bang without much hassle. The easiest example is IMDb, but my success rate guessing is pretty high. Plus, most people tend to spend most of their time on just a few sites. Knowing one or two bangs is useful enough.
Wikipedia -> !w
Youtube -> !you
reddit user -> !reu
subreddit -> !reddits
also !reddit points to new version, I'd want !redditold
Twitter -> !tweet
Steam -> !steme (???)
Twitch -> !ttv
That being said, if you're on DDG, there's pretty good auto complete on bangs so you can find it by typing the name and looking at the favicons.
I much prefer Firefox's "keyword" favourites. For example, I have a "cpp ..." search that automatically searched cppreference, another one "cmake ..." that searches CMake's documentation, and so on and so forth