Live data from Hacker News

We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

peebs.org

21–30 of 146 posts

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#21
>1. Google is making arbitrary rules on how sites should behave, because they have a monopoly.

How are rules against paid linking scams or procedure generated content farms considered arbitrary? It's clearly trying to game the system, and the rules are explicitly laid out to tell you NOT to do it.

>2. Google needs these rules, because Google’s rankings are apparently trivial to game.

If this were true, you can make millions executing your plan for any number of websites. It's not.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#22
post #2

duckduckgo.com

I use it but for many queries it still isn't good enough.

Funny. I use DDG as my default. Frankly, I think it's results are way better than Google's. Yes, they are more simple-minded and less "intelligent", but then they are much more predictable as well. As such, it took some getting used to, but now I feel like I search more precisely than I ever would with Google.

Way too often, Google will try to be "smart", and search for some "intelligent" interpretation of my search, where no such thing was called for. Especially for technical, precise searches for "strange" strings, this can get really annoying.

Also, those bang-searches are just genius. I regularly search Wikipedia, programming language docs, or maps using those. And yes, sometimes Google as well, mostly for fuzzy "how do I" searches or searches that I don't know precise keywords for.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#23
post #2

duckduckgo.com

I use duck duck go as my default in my search bar, but I rarely actually use it to search the web directly. Instead, I use the !bang features to get where I need to go faster without taking my hands off the keyboard. Some examples:

ctrl-t !w cyclocross

ctrl-t !g site:ohio.gov filetype:pdf economic development

ctrl-t !image sad reaction gif

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#24
post #2

duckduckgo.com

I use it but for many queries it still isn't good enough.

If you're outside of the US the results are left wanting for day to day searches.

That said, the little helper widgets are brilliant. I find them more useful more often than the Google result widgets.

I've already switched back to G on pretty much all my machines.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#25
post #5

Part of the problem is that Google's PageRank algorithm is patented and the patent won't expire until 2017. Google insists that its current search mix is based on a lot more than just PageRank, but it seems that PageRank probably contributes the foundation of their business. I don't see a way of competing with Google's results unless we are allowed to use something like PageRank, which we can't do unless we pay royal…

PageRank is almost certainly only a signal used in a learned model. An important signal, but probably one feature in hundreds, if not thousands. It was a critical algorithm to helping them overcome Yahoo in the 90's, but I doubt it is as essential these days.

What is the most important signal? Click-throughs. This is why any new search engine is at a massive disadvantage.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#26
post #21

>1. Google is making arbitrary rules on how sites should behave, because they have a monopoly. How are rules against paid linking scams or procedure generated content farms considered arbitrary? It's clearly trying to game the system, and the rules are explicitly laid out to tell you NOT to do it. >2. Google needs these rules, because Google’s rankings are apparently trivial to game. If this were true, you can make m…

> paid linking scams

One man's advertising is another man's paid linking scam. Do you know where to draw the line? Google doesn't - or at least they can't create an algorithm that knows the difference, even after significant investment in the problem.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#27
post #15

I would say that Bing already is a viable alternative. Having used it for several months now, there aren't too many queries that it doesn't handle well, and usually when I check Google's results for those queries, they are equally bad.

Bing has finally gotten to the point where I don't fallback to Google queries anymore (I used to end up doing that about once a day in the past). I just use Bing now, and only use Google when I hear about some interesting Google art on their homepage.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#28
post #15

I would say that Bing already is a viable alternative. Having used it for several months now, there aren't too many queries that it doesn't handle well, and usually when I check Google's results for those queries, they are equally bad.

It's certainly true that Google's search product has been getting worse and worse for years. You have to jump through hoops to get the real ("verbatim") search results, rather than "what we thought you might mean".

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#29
post #5

Part of the problem is that Google's PageRank algorithm is patented and the patent won't expire until 2017. Google insists that its current search mix is based on a lot more than just PageRank, but it seems that PageRank probably contributes the foundation of their business. I don't see a way of competing with Google's results unless we are allowed to use something like PageRank, which we can't do unless we pay royal…

The scientific literature shows that PageRank is not as good as it is cracked up to be, particularly with the TREC style of evaluation.

The issue is that PageRank is a general factor which doesn't have much to do with the question of ("is page A relevant for topic B?") If PageRank causes a popular but irrelevant page to rank above an unpopular but relevant page it is part of the problem, not the solution.

Re: We Need Viable Search Engine Competition

#30
post #8

I wish more people would use and/or improve YaCy[0]. It's a decentralized search engine. Client is written in java. With the power of decentralisation hardware shouldn't really be an issue. It's just that the search result somewhat sucked the last time I tried it. But I guess now is a good time to install it again, help scraping the internet, and maybe hack at the code. [0] http://yacy.net/en/

I love the idea of this stuff but I'm so scared things like this install a backdoor to our PCs. Is there any way to mitigate this? Run YaCy in a VM on VirtualBox?

Since it's open source, I doubt something like that would go unnoticed. You can check out the source here though: https://gitorious.org/yacy
Post reply on HN