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

81–90 of 104 posts

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

#81

Post by JonnieCache »

DanBC wrote: post #74
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.

You are not the typical user that Google is aiming for. I find the unasked for word substitutions and stemming and "corrections" and the bubble frustrating, but I recognise that I'm an edge case. Google really should have some kind of "what you type is what you get" mode, with user-definable stemming and word substitution and bubbles and etc. ( http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your... ) > we fo…

> Google really should have some kind of "what you type is what you get" mode

http://googlesystem.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/google-verbatim.h...

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

#82

Post by brudgers »

moultano wrote: post #76
brudgers wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Think of it as having poor proxies for quality" I think of it as good proxies for revenue. It just makes more business sense, and seems more in line with the fiduciary responsibilities of Google's board in regard to Google's stock holders. And that's why I don't doubt your statements that the algorithm doesn't do this or that. There are proxies. If Billy Beene could do it a decade ago in Oakland, it is hard to see…

Ranking tries to make money by returning good search results so that people use Google. Ads tries to make money by showing good ads so that people click on them. Ranking only cares about revenue in that they want to make a product worth using. Look, I've worked in search at Google for over 5 years. I know all of the signals that determine how results are ranked and most of the details about how they are used. I know…

As noted previously, explain "q=weather"

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

#83

Post by fpgeek »

replax wrote: post #80
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 could not agree more. That becomes even more frustrating when you (temporarily) are in another country and suddenly get smacked in your face by incorrect location based search results. If google wants to really retain traction with people who want to search for what they type (don't even get me started on the "showing results for: $bshere, if you want to see results for what you searched for, click here"), then the…

Apparently I want to get you started on "showing results for: $bshere, if you want to see results for what you searched for, click here", because I'm amazed that anyone complains about it.

For the overwhelming majority of my typos, "$bshere" is exactly what I wanted to search for. I particularly appreciate this when I'm searching from my phone (where typos are more common). There have been times when it has gone the other way (searching for "WiDi" aka Intel Wireless Display is the most notable example I can remember), but those are rare enough (and understandable enough) that they don't bother me.

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

#84

Post by DanBC »

JonnieCache wrote: post #81
DanBC wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not the typical user that Google is aiming for. I find the unasked for word substitutions and stemming and "corrections" and the bubble frustrating, but I recognise that I'm an edge case. Google really should have some kind of "what you type is what you get" mode, with user-definable stemming and word substitution and bubbles and etc. ( http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your... ) > we fo…

> Google really should have some kind of "what you type is what you get" mode http://googlesystem.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/google-verbatim.h...

..."with user-definable stemming and word substitution".

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

#85

Post by marshray »

mayanksinghal wrote: post #64
marshray wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware that Google runs an entire ad network? It's said to dominate the field of online advertising. Anyone know what proportion of their revenue comes from ad placement on their own product pages?

I didn't understand the reasoning behind the retort. >Are you aware that Google runs an entire ad network? Which would mean that they would want to keep such third party sites interesting, fast and high quality as well. Chrome, Analytics and their other similar products/services are hence justified.

I'm saying the search engine, email, phone OS, and social forums are Google products which are just tangentially related to their advertising business. It would be interesting to know what the real split in revenue is in the discussion about what their real "product" is.

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

#86

Post by marshray »

brudgers wrote: post #82
moultano wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ranking tries to make money by returning good search results so that people use Google. Ads tries to make money by showing good ads so that people click on them. Ranking only cares about revenue in that they want to make a product worth using. Look, I've worked in search at Google for over 5 years. I know all of the signals that determine how results are ranked and most of the details about how they are used. I know…

As noted previously, explain "q=weather"

When I go to q=weather, I see a local weather summary above the search results. Is that what you're referring to?

I think of it as additional information Google supplies, I don't think of it as part of the search results.

I liked the old Google better. Today DDG has the simpler interface and gives me 50% more search results to choose from. Google looks more like the old Yahoo or Netscape portal every day.

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

#87

Post by tripzilch »

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…

> What makes you love Google is Google giving you the right answer.

No it's not. What I loved about Google is giving me the ability to search the web. If my answer wasn't on the first page (or even the second), I'd refine my query until I would get it. Which was easy because Google was very deterministic, just your basic "AND" keyword search engine. Try a few synonyms maybe, different angle, synecdochical approach[1] and if all that didn't get you your answer, it probably wasn't there[2].

Today, you type in your query, Google tries to guess what you need, and shows you your results. If your answer is not there, you can try different queries, synonyms, whatever, but you'll get mostly the same results again. The web being unimaginably bigger than 10 years ago when I used the approach described above, I refuse to believe my answer's not there. Google is just being dumb.

Anyone know of a proper Search Engine? (I love Duck Duck Go but its index is rather small)

[1]http://www.searchlores.org/synecdoc.htm

[2]actually, you were probably not trying hard enough. Pressing on over the course of a week and getting some expert friends to help you would always show that your answer was in fact there. in some form or another.

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

#88

Post by dubya »

bambax wrote: post #9
indiecore wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem of course is that what Google actually IS and what people THINK Google is are two completely different things. Google is an ad company, always remember that.

The argument that "it's a business" is weak and not very helpful. Google makes its money from advertising, but in order for it to place ads it needs to serve relevant results; serving "tailored" results because they generate more clicks is short-sighted (well, that's the argument anyway). If people become so distrustful of Google that they stop using it, and use a combination of DDG or Wolfram Alpha for example, then…

"It's a business" is a weak argument, but potentially a helpful one. Your optimal search experience generally won't line up with theirs. In retail, for example, there are all kinds of tricks used to keep customers in the store as long as possible without making the experience so unbearable that customers just won't come anymore. So if you go to the grocery store for some fruit and vegs and yogurt, you will need to visit opposite ends of the store, through the seasonal items and past racks of candy, because this apparently results in increased sales. If they were optimizing for you, they would have the basics near the entrance, and the Peeps and cinnamon brooms at the farthest corner. They might still have the best produce in town, but as they figure out how to wring more money out of their customers (on average), the experience becomes grating for some portion of their clientele.

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

#89

Post by tripzilch »

JonnieCache wrote: post #81
DanBC wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not the typical user that Google is aiming for. I find the unasked for word substitutions and stemming and "corrections" and the bubble frustrating, but I recognise that I'm an edge case. Google really should have some kind of "what you type is what you get" mode, with user-definable stemming and word substitution and bubbles and etc. ( http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your... ) > we fo…

> Google really should have some kind of "what you type is what you get" mode http://googlesystem.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/google-verbatim.h...

Oh wow, if that works I'm going to use Google again. I hope there's some easy way to switch on that setting with a GET parameter so I can replace my default Google search.

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

#90

Post by kenferry »

zmj wrote: post #36
loganfrederick wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Having a mental model of how the google search ranking works sounds… hard. For me the mental model works out to be "based on various statistics, google's best match for my search terms". I'm not sure that's different from "the best answer". :-)
Post reply on HN