The world needs more search engines • Hacker News Board

Re: The world needs more search engines

#261

Post by arrosenberg » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:43 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #239

arrosenberg wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... Fair point - there are certain cases where software platforms are too valuable and complex to break up, and should be regulated like utilities with rules for fair play. Amazon shouldn't be able to use it's marketplace data to monopolize entire categories, Google Search needs to be a public platform, with regulated rates for API access (which Google itsel…

> Google can keep Search, but Ads, Doubleclick, Analytics, Waze, GCP, Google Home - all of that needs to be broken up. > Some of the resulting businesses may have to update their model or may not remain profitable, but historically break-ups have resulted in an increase in value for the new businesses. All of this teaches one lesson: be more like Apple. Treat your customers poorly and massively overcharge them. Make…

> All of this teaches one lesson: be more like Apple. Treat your customers poorly and massively overcharge them. Make sure you are never the biggest in your field. Essentially, don't offer products that are too good for the price.

Or just don't abuse your customers by hiding the ball on what you do with their data. Don't buy up all your competitors, so you can squeeze more and more money out of small businesses who have to buy impressions because the organic ways (which the same companies own) don't work any more. The products aren't too good for the price - we don't even fully know what the price is.

> I'd also like to point out that if those companies have to be spun off on their own, then the only way for some of them to make money is to sell your data to third parties. Right now Google doesn't seem to do that, but how else would Analytics monetize itself, if it cannot offer ads?

The same way Mixpanel, KissMetrics, Adobe and dozens of other web analytics vendors monetize (including Google's own 360 Suite). Or make it clear, up front, how the data will be used on free accounts, and give the user a way to monitor and revoke that agreement at any time. As an independent business, they will be free to find the best path.

Re: The world needs more search engines

#262

Post by kbyatnal » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:43 PM UTC

There needs to be a new search engine focused on the niche of people who hate the current ad spam/SEO results that Google currently returns. A query like "best headphones" returns results like "The Best Headphones for 2019 | PCMag.com".

They've clearly optimized for the mass user base, since the average person is probably fine with a result like that. But I'm willing to bet no one on HN would ever click a link like that, just because of how "spammy" it feels.

When I search for something like "best headphones", my ideal results would be forum/discussion posts (eg. like "Ask HN") where I can read what other programmers/hackers are using, their experience with it, etc. And that's the problem with trying to make a one-size-fits-all search engine - it isn't possible to make everyone happy.

I've actually been working on a product to solve this exact problem. The best comparison would be the old "discussions" filter that Google used to have until they removed it. I'd love to show more people and get feedback. If this is something you'd be interested in trying, drop your email here ( https://degoogle.typeform.com/to/QzVy7c ) and I'll send you the beta

Re: The world needs more search engines

#263

Post by asciident » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:44 PM UTC

candiodari wrote: post #190

mikl wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was around during the “search wars”, and what’s usually forgotten is that well, they were by far the best behaved as a corporate entity. They were well behaved when they had competition to worry about. Once they effectively achieved a monopoly, ethics slowly got relegated to the back seat. They started leveraging the search monopoly to take over other industries, to undermine the open web, to engage in political…

Isn't "project dragonfly" the Google search engine version for China? Google was trying to comply with the law. It's a law you might not agree with, but come on. The reason all these governments want Google split up is more censorship, not less. From torrents to negative reporting on EU commissars. From everyone's interpretation of hate speech to pages pointing out that sometimes social services are the abusers in ch…

You've nailed it. Back when tech was the underdog, it was trying to make things more open, accessible, free-as-in-speech. I remember when the internet was very pro Ron Paul, and against government regulating technology (remember the losing battle against DMCA and DRM and the PATRIOT act?). Now that tech has become successful, the losers (those who want the control) are trying their hardest to create new narratives about tech companies' abuse / monopoly. Can tech be improved? Or course, but with small iterations, not complete overhauls.

Re: The world needs more search engines

#264

Post by bagacrap » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

Tenoke wrote: post #86

freediver wrote: post #56

It is impressive what they built. The results are quite good! The UI shows innovative elements like trackers used on the page. I see two problems with their approach: 1. The product is not built with the 'grandma test' mindset. More sliders and widgets is not what your grandma wants in a search engine. This is why building a search engine is hard. You have to guess with very little information what the user wants and…

>Google must not fall because it is a monopoly. If it was to fall it should be because someone built a better product. One of the reasons for breaking up monopolies is that they make it harder for newcomers to build something better.

I don't think that if Google vanished tomorrow, a new crop of superior search engines would suddenly pop out of the ether to replace it.

Is Google somehow suppressing the creation of a good search engine? No, on the contrary it has created the best web search engine we've ever seen. I would personally be sad if you took it away from me, and I suspect that 99% or more of its users would be in the same boat (don't judge the zeitgeist by web forum echo chambers). You break up monopolies when they are harming users, not in order to cause harm to users.

Re: The world needs more search engines

#265

Post by sambull » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

kbyatnal wrote: post #262

There needs to be a new search engine focused on the niche of people who hate the current ad spam/SEO results that Google currently returns. A query like "best headphones" returns results like "The Best Headphones for 2019 | PCMag.com". They've clearly optimized for the mass user base, since the average person is probably fine with a result like that. But I'm willing to bet no one on HN would ever click a link like t…

Just type reddit after every query and you've got the same function

Re: The world needs more search engines

#266

Post by asciident » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

lonelappde wrote: post #255

candiodari wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't "project dragonfly" the Google search engine version for China? Google was trying to comply with the law. It's a law you might not agree with, but come on. The reason all these governments want Google split up is more censorship, not less. From torrents to negative reporting on EU commissars. From everyone's interpretation of hate speech to pages pointing out that sometimes social services are the abusers in ch…

How would breaking up a company help censorship? Surely it's easier to censor one entity than many.

Divide and conquer. They can push for one of the companies that is pro-censorship.

Re: The world needs more search engines

#267

Post by buboard » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

Google's business is advertising, not search. That's where their monopoly lies and that's where competition is needed. We probably don't need many other search engines. There is only so many improvements to be done in search. Over the years, information has been distilled. Google's main use is as a misspelling corrector, a wikipedia shortcut, a DNS shortcut, a keyword lookup for the news of the day and a product matcher in a few merchant sites. That's because most commercial sectors of the net are already in their post-competitive period, and only the winners in each category are still alive. Their number is not even enough to fit the first page of results. And the content that used to go in blogs, it's now behind twitter or facebook, unreachable to any search engine (except for corporate blogs which are used for SEO reasons). The recent changes in google search have infantilized it, burying anything but the most obvious sites.

SEO doesnt even count that much, instead it's curated "reputation" that matters.We might be at a point where DMOZ is probably viable, because there aren't now 1000 entries in each category, but 10. In fact a Dmoz would probably be a mightier competitor to their search.

But the key is , we need competition in advertising. After http referrer was removed from queries, we left all the information about the user's intent to google, and, unsurprisingly , they ate it all, and then some more, leaving a progressively diminishing piece of the advertising/intent processing pie to the rest of the internet. Is that ethical? Is it OK that a website doesn't know why the user visited it? After all, the user typed it in the browser's bar , not on google. Perhaps search queries should be initiated in the browser, and available to subsequent clicks for processing.

And as for tracking, is it OK that google is the only one who is tracking users? Shouldnt tracking be a user's decision, provided and mediated by the browser to any website who asks for it? Like it or not, advertising is not going away and it's healthier for the net if a large number of publishers share that (growing) pie rather than if google eats all of it. Tracking doesnt kill people, but anti-tracking hysteria causes many people to lose their jobs. Perhaps we should be pragmatic, because being irrationally anti-pragmatic is only serving Google's long-term interests

Re: The world needs more search engines

#268

Post by bryanrasmussen » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #239

arrosenberg wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... Fair point - there are certain cases where software platforms are too valuable and complex to break up, and should be regulated like utilities with rules for fair play. Amazon shouldn't be able to use it's marketplace data to monopolize entire categories, Google Search needs to be a public platform, with regulated rates for API access (which Google itsel…

> Google can keep Search, but Ads, Doubleclick, Analytics, Waze, GCP, Google Home - all of that needs to be broken up. > Some of the resulting businesses may have to update their model or may not remain profitable, but historically break-ups have resulted in an increase in value for the new businesses. All of this teaches one lesson: be more like Apple. Treat your customers poorly and massively overcharge them. Make…

I think generally that Apple treats its customers better than Google treats its users.

Re: The world needs more search engines

#269

Post by dangrossman » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #239

arrosenberg wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... Fair point - there are certain cases where software platforms are too valuable and complex to break up, and should be regulated like utilities with rules for fair play. Amazon shouldn't be able to use it's marketplace data to monopolize entire categories, Google Search needs to be a public platform, with regulated rates for API access (which Google itsel…

> Google can keep Search, but Ads, Doubleclick, Analytics, Waze, GCP, Google Home - all of that needs to be broken up. > Some of the resulting businesses may have to update their model or may not remain profitable, but historically break-ups have resulted in an increase in value for the new businesses. All of this teaches one lesson: be more like Apple. Treat your customers poorly and massively overcharge them. Make…

> how else would Analytics monetize itself

Charge money for the product. Plenty of other companies in the space do so successfully. There's ample business value provided by good analytics.

Google Analytics was originally the product of Google's acquisition of Urchin Software. At the time, Urchin's self-hosted version cost $895 with additional optional "modules" that cost up to $3,995 extra. Their "on demand" version cost $199 per month.

Re: The world needs more search engines

#270

Post by mikl » Sun, Dec 01, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

candiodari wrote: post #190

mikl wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was around during the “search wars”, and what’s usually forgotten is that well, they were by far the best behaved as a corporate entity. They were well behaved when they had competition to worry about. Once they effectively achieved a monopoly, ethics slowly got relegated to the back seat. They started leveraging the search monopoly to take over other industries, to undermine the open web, to engage in political…

Isn't "project dragonfly" the Google search engine version for China? Google was trying to comply with the law. It's a law you might not agree with, but come on. The reason all these governments want Google split up is more censorship, not less. From torrents to negative reporting on EU commissars. From everyone's interpretation of hate speech to pages pointing out that sometimes social services are the abusers in ch…

> Google was trying to comply with the law.

Google was trying to gain the Chinese market by implementing political censorship. And once they knelt and swore allegiance to the Chinese regime, every other totalitarian regime around the world would be lining up with demands that they do the same in their countries.

Expecting Google to stand up to EU on anything is naïve. They already got massive fines, they don’t have the spine to risk more. They will do as the commisars dictates, whether they’re split up or not.