>I was too young to use Google when it first got started
This statement aged me 10 years
Reddit can't build a better search engine
11–20 of 289 posts
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#12But the practice of appending 'reddit' to your Google search isn't depending on Reddit building a better search engine. It's using Google's search engine, and trying to direct it to a database that you hope has the answer you're looking for. So there's that. Of course, if that practice became widespread, then people could still try to stuff Reddit posts with junk in the hope that it gets picked up by Google in these…
There was a post, which trended on HN yesterday (2000+ upvotes) that stated Reddit is sitting on a gold mine and they can build a better search engine because people are appending 'reddit' at the end of it.
This is a response to the original post, explaining why the logic behind is it false.
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#13But the practice of appending 'reddit' to your Google search isn't depending on Reddit building a better search engine. It's using Google's search engine, and trying to direct it to a database that you hope has the answer you're looking for. So there's that. Of course, if that practice became widespread, then people could still try to stuff Reddit posts with junk in the hope that it gets picked up by Google in these…
> people could still try to stuff Reddit posts with junk in the hope that it gets picked up by Google in these searches
This is already happening. I search for reviews and help on Reddit via Google often, and it's not that uncommon for the first result to be SEO spam: a Reddit post with no votes or comments, just lots of keywords and a link to a product or another site.
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#14> I was too young to use Google when it first got started, but according to many, in the beginning, Google had better or more accurate search results. One reason for this was the fact that most of the sites back then were indie websites, which did not care about SEO and money and created websites for sharing information. > But I think all can agree that Google results reduced when people started to game the algorithm…
>It is only more recently that they seem to have given up.
They haven't given up; the OP has a point. The "sites" you are hoping for Google to return _don't exist_. Any website online right now that doesn't exist to drive ad revenue is exceedingly rare. In 2001, there were way more websites that existed just for fun; any tom, dick and harry could open up note pad and get a website online. That doesn't exist anymore.
It's my opinion that those who complain about Google search results are frustrated that Google can no longer find a web that no longer exists
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#15> I was too young to use Google when it first got started, but according to many, in the beginning, Google had better or more accurate search results. One reason for this was the fact that most of the sites back then were indie websites, which did not care about SEO and money and created websites for sharing information. > But I think all can agree that Google results reduced when people started to game the algorithm…
When it came out, PageRank was a really innovative way to order search results that cut through most of the "SEO" at the time, which was webpages doing lots of unsophisticated things to range well for a given topic (e.g., putting that topic in the many times).
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#16This is exactly right: if Reddit ever decided to build a search engine they'd wind up destroying their site, because everyone would try to game the results and fill Reddit with crap to do it. The point it is that search engines are adversarial: people who are skilled and determined are actively trying to replace good results with their results.
Their site has been thoroughly trashed already. It's an absolute cesspool of bots and groupthink. When I joined back in 2007, it was a completely different site full of actual discussion and not just cringey self deprecating nerd jokes and memes.
It's a shame, but that's how things go. Once a thing gets that big, it gets its soul sucked out.
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#17>Reddit can't build a better search engine
Reddit cant build any search functionality whatsoever. Current search is so broken It cant even find my own posts.
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#18> I was too young to use Google when it first got started, but according to many, in the beginning, Google had better or more accurate search results. One reason for this was the fact that most of the sites back then were indie websites, which did not care about SEO and money and created websites for sharing information. > But I think all can agree that Google results reduced when people started to game the algorithm…
> It is only more recently that they seem to have given up. They haven't given up; the OP has a point. The "sites" you are hoping for Google to return _don't exist_. Any website online right now that doesn't exist to drive ad revenue is exceedingly rare. In 2001, there were way more websites that existed just for fun; any tom, dick and harry could open up note pad and get a website online. That doesn't exist anymore.…
No. There still are forums on lots of topics. But search how to fix X and instead of prioritizing a forum site with answers you get 5 top results trying to sell you the parts to fix X. The answers are always way down the list.
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#19Reddit doesn't really need to build a search engine, they could just have an algolia instance like HN does: https://hn.algolia.com/.
While not perfect, it does a pretty good job, in my experience.
However, the article makes a valid point -- the moment people start using it heavily, we'll get a reddit comment equivalent of SEO, with keyword stuffing and whatnot.
Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine
#20> I was too young to use Google when it first got started, but according to many, in the beginning, Google had better or more accurate search results. One reason for this was the fact that most of the sites back then were indie websites, which did not care about SEO and money and created websites for sharing information. > But I think all can agree that Google results reduced when people started to game the algorithm…
> It is only more recently that they seem to have given up. They haven't given up; the OP has a point. The "sites" you are hoping for Google to return _don't exist_. Any website online right now that doesn't exist to drive ad revenue is exceedingly rare. In 2001, there were way more websites that existed just for fun; any tom, dick and harry could open up note pad and get a website online. That doesn't exist anymore.…
> It's my opinion that those who complain about Google search results are frustrated that Google can no longer find a web that no longer exists
That, and the Google search results are bad for the parts that do exist.