The about "number" results should give an idea but it might not be accurate, tells google.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ix3mHeL7hg
Anyway you only get the first 1000 results of your googling.
600613
11–20 of 20 posts
Re: 600613
#12> Most numbers of this magnitude garner a few thousand hits on Google, but 25898913 gets 29,500,000. If you actually click through the results, on pages 1-34 you get "Page 34 of about 24,900,000 results (0.34 seconds) ", but on page 35 you discover that there are only actually 341 results.
I've found this to be consistent behaviour with Google. The number of search results tend to be totally unreliable. I don't know if they use the same search algorithm for gmail, but the same problem occurs there as well. Initially it might say 1-50 of 100 results, go to the second page and suddenly it's 50-100 of 2000. And on the next page 100-150 of "many". Google search-hit count has never been fully accurate - I s…
Google acknowledges this: https://support.google.com/gsa/answer/2672285?hl=en
I remember seeing a more in depth article about this but cant find it at the moment.
Re: 600613
#1310,041,295,923 now returns exactly one result - the author's page, just as he theorized. I wonder if it'll return two results soon.
https://archive.today/j8KXp Now it does!
Re: 600613
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've found this to be consistent behaviour with Google. The number of search results tend to be totally unreliable. I don't know if they use the same search algorithm for gmail, but the same problem occurs there as well. Initially it might say 1-50 of 100 results, go to the second page and suddenly it's 50-100 of 2000. And on the next page 100-150 of "many". Google search-hit count has never been fully accurate - I s…
Google acknowledges this: https://support.google.com/gsa/answer/2672285?hl=en I remember seeing a more in depth article about this but cant find it at the moment.
So apparently it is possible to get an accurate result count (for up to 1 million results) using "rc = 1"? Does anyone have an examples illustrating this behavior (I can't seem to contrive one where it makes a difference)?
Re: 600613
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google acknowledges this: https://support.google.com/gsa/answer/2672285?hl=en I remember seeing a more in depth article about this but cant find it at the moment.
So apparently it is possible to get an accurate result count (for up to 1 million results) using "rc = 1"? Does anyone have an examples illustrating this behavior (I can't seem to contrive one where it makes a difference)?
I suspect rc=1 applies to enterprise search.
Re: 600613
#16I think it's a matter of scale. The scale of the human race gives us a range of number that are humanly comprehensible.
Their distribution diminishes as they make less and less sense to our scale.
Re: 600613
#17In response to the trivia question: I'm assuming that it's impossible to find some N wit fewer than 10 digits. In all of my attempts I've received results relating to phone number reverse-lookup sites. There also seems to be this website which exists just to generate a page full of numbers with any given prefix (defined in the URL): http://www.qzonecom.com/mobile/maanshan_511556.html Why?!
That's my favorite thing about the internet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cghg-QyTP_M No reason
Re: 600613
#18> Most numbers of this magnitude garner a few thousand hits on Google, but 25898913 gets 29,500,000. If you actually click through the results, on pages 1-34 you get "Page 34 of about 24,900,000 results (0.34 seconds) ", but on page 35 you discover that there are only actually 341 results.
It's a bit ridiculous how Google shows those numbers on top and people constantly quote there are X results for Y when the real results are always far off from that. There are 382,000 results for {number of "google results"}!
Re: 600613
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
So apparently it is possible to get an accurate result count (for up to 1 million results) using "rc = 1"? Does anyone have an examples illustrating this behavior (I can't seem to contrive one where it makes a difference)?
I suspect rc=1 applies to enterprise search.
Ah, that makes sense. Thanks!
Re: 600613
#20That is pretty much the kind of posts I come to HN for. Thanks for the read :)