Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reddit can't build a better search engine

ruky.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 289 posts

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#71

Post by csee »

nemothekid wrote: post #14
lamontcg wrote: post #10

> 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 is largely Google's fault.

Example. If you searched the word "flight" in 2002, the first two results would be NASA links and the third would be the Museum of Flight. These pages still exist. But now the entire first page of Google search results are cost comparison websites. This is Google's badness, not the web's.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#72

Post by mdoms »

This argument makes precisely zero sense. We've already established that people are using site:reddit.com in search queries so the incentive already exists. And frankly Reddit is already at least 50% astro turfed. But search results on Reddit are still more useful for many queries.

It's also worth noting that unlike Google, Reddit has total control over the content that they're indexing. If they detect bad SEO actors they have far more power to influence them or shut them down completely because they're indexing a platform they control. Google is indexing the open web.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#73

Post by eitland »

nemothekid wrote: post #14
lamontcg wrote: post #10

> 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.…

> They haven't given up; the OP has a point. The "sites" you are hoping for Google to return _don't exist_.

I was beginning to wonder if this explanation was true but after starting to use Marginalia (mostly for fun) I now know the old web still exists - Google just doesn't let me see it.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#74

Post by jamjamjamjamjam »

nemothekid wrote: post #14
lamontcg wrote: post #10

> 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.…

Because its simply not possible. There are too many barriers now. You need to get a static ip for one. Domains cost more. Email for those domains costs quite a bit. And your friends are far less likely to visit since theyre all addicted to infinite scrolling websites

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#75

Post by makeitdouble »

lamontcg wrote: post #10

> 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…

I think the incentives are not there anymore.

Before the rise of smartphones a competitor could have emerged and take users from Google. Yahoo wasn't completely dead yet. Platforms were mostly open, a sea change could have happened (though highly unlikely).

Into the smartphone area, other engines became anecdotal (bing just exists in the background), there is enough lock-in to not have to fear against direct competition, and the main focus becomes having users spend more time on the web, search more, instead of staying in native apps. That's were, if my memory is correct, they ditch language based landing pages and start fazing out modifier support and all the "power user" part of their interface.

Fighting SEO scams becomes a waste of time when it has no real impact on wether user will continue to use the product or not.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#76

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

"However, once Reddit creates a search engine, and once people get to know that there is an opportunity to game the system and create a financial opportunity, people will abuse that system and we will be back to the place where we are now. SEO stuffed websites."

Reddit already has a "search engine" to search reddit.com. People used to call this "site search". As Google became popular, some websites gave up on site search and outsourced it to Google. Nevertheless, plenty of websites still have their own search engine. They do not use Google.

AFAICT, Reddit does not use Google for site search. Let's put the premise in the author's title to the test. Someone suggest some search terms. We will then search (a) using Reddit's site search and (b) using Google search with "site:reddit.com". We can then compare the results from (a) and (b).

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#77

Post by z6p58yKQDA4 »

ddtaylor wrote: post #57
notRobot wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't you guys add a flat monthly/one-time usage fee?

Accepting payment for this kind of service is actually quite problematic. Even more so now that the vast majority of the userbase is Only Fans creators. I'm not saying it should be like that, but if you've ever tried to accept payments for anything "high risk" it's a nightmare. For example, Stripe won't allow any of it at all. It's blacklisted in multiple ways through their restricted services.

No post body was provided.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#78

Post by ashtuchkin »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #76

"However, once Reddit creates a search engine, and once people get to know that there is an opportunity to game the system and create a financial opportunity, people will abuse that system and we will be back to the place where we are now. SEO stuffed websites." Reddit already has a "search engine" to search reddit.com. People used to call this "site search". As Google became popular, some websites gave up on site se…

Reddit does have its own search engine, it's just bad. The premise in the author's post is that as soon as it becomes "good", the SEO optimizators will ruin it in the same way they ruined Google search.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#79

Post by o_m »

nemothekid wrote: post #14
lamontcg wrote: post #10

> 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.…

They have given up, as in if you Google anything technical these days you'll get tons of spam sites who just copies the content from GitHub and StackOverflow. Google used to punish sites that just copied content from other sites, but that isn't the case anymore.

Re: Reddit can't build a better search engine

#80

Post by Crazyontap »

lamontcg wrote: post #10

> 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…

The real experts or people who create great content just for the sake of sharing information never care about backlinks and whatever else Google requires for SEO.. OTOH the SEO scammers like Pinterest create little content and give the search engine exactly what it wants (backlinks, social signals, etc) which is why the good content is so hard to find.

But at the end of the day it's the search engine's job to separate the wheat from the chaff and google has been doing a very poor job of it lately. Like the article right said, the best is to prioritise websites that are about sharing knowledge not affiliate marketing, paid ads, marketing, etc.

Post reply on HN