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

Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#31

Post by antoko »

lkrubner wrote: post #23
drhayes9 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A little off-topic, but... Why is this getting down-voted? Is it because you disagree with what this person is saying? I thought down-votes were only for things that didn't contribute to the conversation. It feels like this is getting down-voted because people don't like that Google is doing these things. So, this person is getting down-voted 'cuz of Google? Huh?

Sadly, Paul Graham has endorsed the idea of using the downvote to express disagreement. I personally dislike this use of the downvote, but it does have official sanction. Read this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171

Just because something CAN be done doesn't mean it SHOULD be done. I think the community benefits from people expressing counter-arguments far more than grey-ing out minority opinion.

I'd hope a majority of users here feel the same way and act accordingly - pg's comments not withstanding.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#32

Post by yanw »

At first search signals were mainly provided by the content itself and now signals from the user are being incorporated.

There is already an established term for this and it’s not “filter bubble” or “tailoring” the term is “relevance” and it’s the core of search.

If the author is suggesting that data about a user’s identity, history, and location isn't usefully to providing her with the best possible results then he should stick to writing about stuff he actually comprehends and not be the umpteenth author resorting to use “Google” in the title to whore traffic.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#33

Post by loganfrederick »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #25
robrenaud wrote: post #14

> It isn't that anymore, though. Searches are geospecific and social network-dependent. All of which is fine and useful, but that's not what made us love Google's search engine. What makes you love Google is Google giving you the right answer. If you live in the US, do a google search for dmv. Did it pull the one from your state? Do you really want an averaged across all searchers answer? California is probably the s…

> If you live in the US, do a google search for dmv. First of all, no, it doesn't give me the DMV for my state first. And second, why would I do that when I can easily search for "$statename dmv" and have that search universally do the right thing regardless of location? I don't want hidden inputs to my search based on my location; I want everything that determines the results encapsulated in the query.

I think this debate hits at an important point; different people want different things. Some people would find it easier to type "dmv" and have the engine know they want "dmv open right now and closest to my location". Some people, like you, want the search engine to handle your input without external influences.

In the end, it might be optimal for the world to have multiple, specialized search engines/apps to please as many wants as possible.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#34

Post by PaulMcCartney »

It's nice to romanticize what Google might've once been, but at the end of the day Google is a tool that provides a service. To have a qualm regarding the current user experience is a different story, but in terms of the delivery of sought after content I don't think one could argue they have taken steps anywhere but forwards.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#36

Post by zmj »

loganfrederick wrote: post #33
JoshTriplett wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you live in the US, do a google search for dmv. First of all, no, it doesn't give me the DMV for my state first. And second, why would I do that when I can easily search for "$statename dmv" and have that search universally do the right thing regardless of location? I don't want hidden inputs to my search based on my location; I want everything that determines the results encapsulated in the query.

I think this debate hits at an important point; different people want different things. Some people would find it easier to type "dmv" and have the engine know they want "dmv open right now and closest to my location". Some people, like you, want the search engine to handle your input without external influences. In the end, it might be optimal for the world to have multiple, specialized search engines/apps to please…

The reality of it is slightly more meta than that. Some people just want the right answer. Some people want a tool that they can build a consistent mental model of.

Hackers prefer the latter. Everyone else? That's up in the air.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#37

Post by qeorge »

It reminds me of HN itself.

I don't want to know what the "average" likes to read, or even what people like me like to read. I want to know what smart, interesting people (not me!) like to read.

In other words: I want curation by an expert, not the average of everyone's inputs. Google is supposed to know the right answer, not ask all my friends what the answer is and report back.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#38

Post by tlogan »

robrenaud wrote: post #14

> It isn't that anymore, though. Searches are geospecific and social network-dependent. All of which is fine and useful, but that's not what made us love Google's search engine. What makes you love Google is Google giving you the right answer. If you live in the US, do a google search for dmv. Did it pull the one from your state? Do you really want an averaged across all searchers answer? California is probably the s…

I was expecting that DMV is shown as special result on top - something like "are you searching for DMV office next to your location?" ...

But you explained the core of the problem. There are two kinds of searches:

1) discovery of information

2) finding information I probably know but I'm just too lazy to go that site directly (or something in that sense)

The first kind of search is what made Google the most popular search engine. The second kind of search is something new for Google and it seems it is implemented as a unsophisticated simplification of the complex problem. It is like AOL search all over again.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#39

Post by spc476 »

robrenaud wrote: post #14

> It isn't that anymore, though. Searches are geospecific and social network-dependent. All of which is fine and useful, but that's not what made us love Google's search engine. What makes you love Google is Google giving you the right answer. If you live in the US, do a google search for dmv. Did it pull the one from your state? Do you really want an averaged across all searchers answer? California is probably the s…

I did a Google search for "dmv". The first result, an ad, is for Florida, where I live. The next three non-ad based results are for California, Virginia and New York. The fourth (and on) non-ad results are for Florida.

A Google search for "florida dmv" returned Florida-based results.

What I am tired of seeing are Eames chair ads all over the place. Do one search for Eames chairs, and click on one paid result, and now all I see are Eames chair ads. Sigh.

At least it's a break from the casino school ads I was getting.

Re: Paul Graham, the Commons, and How Google Stopped Being Google

#40

Post by Dylan16807 »

drhayes9 wrote: post #17
robrenaud wrote: post #14

> It isn't that anymore, though. Searches are geospecific and social network-dependent. All of which is fine and useful, but that's not what made us love Google's search engine. What makes you love Google is Google giving you the right answer. If you live in the US, do a google search for dmv. Did it pull the one from your state? Do you really want an averaged across all searchers answer? California is probably the s…

A little off-topic, but... Why is this getting down-voted? Is it because you disagree with what this person is saying? I thought down-votes were only for things that didn't contribute to the conversation. It feels like this is getting down-voted because people don't like that Google is doing these things. So, this person is getting down-voted 'cuz of Google? Huh?

Some people might have downvoted based on the DMV example apparently being wrong. Factual inaccuracy can be a good reason to downvote.
Post reply on HN