ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

A Very Simple Ethical Principle for Search: Google Fails Miserably

<< < (7/9) > >>

Curt:
I finally remembered why I stopped using Copernic for web searches. -app103 (May 05, 2007, 07:33 AM)
--- End quote ---

I tried Copernic, and didn't like it, but I never realized it is this bad!! :o

onyx:
app103 - I stand corrected.  If Scroogle becomes a major site, Google will probably request the site cease and desist.  My hunch is they haven't been visited simply because the site hasn't been used by that many people.

dk70:
Killing ads is easy and not worth complaining about since there are solutions. But is avoiding sites with ads not being hypocritical unless you have very selected taste and bookmarks? I cant use Admuncher without being hypocritical since I use many sites which are based on advertising. Possible to whitelist of course. If only majority of sites could stay within borders like set by Google I dont think there would be so many anti-advertising feelings. Some just cant control them self hunting down $$$, like putting ads in between posts on a forum! Other sites almost designed to make room for ads. Im open to the suggestion that there are too many websites run by fools and many deserve to die - have plenty of excuses for Admuncher ;)

I dont think there is a special Google World/standard zridling. Screaming they censor in China without looking at what MS, Yahoo, most likely also industry/government of your country, is doing dont make sense. Avoiding taxes, exploiting muscles also a common sport among such companies, some are hired for these activities. We probably only see top of the iceberg. Google is smart because they still present them self in a way that does not make you think world domination or oops I better hide plastic card! - not that much focusing on $$$/advertising. They dont have a "Windows Market Place". So that is MS and too easy but Google is very different in user experience, like they expect you to have a brain. Im sure that is how they gained momentum - now unstoppable perhaps. Does not make them angle like when it comes to business. Dont know where that expectation comes from.

Unless Mousers wet dream of new engine with a no profit policy comes true there is no real alternative. Stumbleupon is not without advertising/sponsoring btw - not that is has anything to do with Google, not a search engine in any way. Money is always a player. Now you can wait for Stumbleupon to grow bigger and bigger - eventually they make mistakes and get same criticism as Google. Unavoidable. Going "Least evil" and manipulating at users end is only way to deal with this.

Live.com has some cool sliders under advanced. "Results ranking" - something Google should implement. No matter detailed guides not many use advanced search operators or even advanced search page. Sliders might change approach and remind users hits are result of more parameters than simple keyword. If Google really had information treatment as top priority they would only offer advanced search page.

broken85:
But information treatment is only one priority these days... simplicity is one of google's major advantages. Aside from the little one-liners about google services, their home page is almost as empty as it always was and loads just as quickly. There's one box where you can enter whatever the hell you want, and Google will usually find, decipher, or correct whatever it is. Most people don't even realize they can enter search operators into the box to get more specific (I'm a frequent excluder of words in google), and Google probably likes it that way.

You don't have to explain one single thing about them, their page, or how to use Google in general, even to some without any computer knowledge, because it is so incredibly fast and simple. If they only offered an advanced search page, that simplicity would be gone. Even if you didn't enter anything except in the top search box, you have still lost that "empty" simplicity that is Google and replaced it with power features which, for the most part, aren't even necessary if you use operators in the search. I like Google's advanced search feature, but I'm glad they offer the simple one-field search box on their homepage; it's part of the reason I've stuck with Google for so long (aside from the fact that the results I get from Google are often leaps and bounds more relevant than those I get from other engines).

Not only is Google the fastest (at searching and displaying pages) search engine I have ever used, it still manages to be the most powerful. What I find on the first page or two in Google is often what I'd have to browse through pages of results for in other engines. I am also a fan of the fact that when they add new features and services, they generally do it behind the scenes and leave their core service alone (at least seemingly). That consistency is great in a world where so many sites are trying to be the be-all end-all of Internet destinations and are just adding layers and layers of complexity and often useless features. Go Google!

mouser:
I think onyx and broken85 make some good points.

I wouldn't want to be taking traffic away from the small little sites who are managing to make some money from ads on their pages.  I really want these small sites to survive and do well.

Even if i might be happier with a more community-involved micro-donation funding system for them, i'm not at all opposed in principal to sites making money from ads.

Actually i don't find most google ads on pages particularly annoying.

It's not the ads per se that i'm trying to avoid.

But i am keenly interested in the idea that google has its own little "wink and grin" secret ranking algorithms which they don't want to explain or justify, and entire industries of seo trying to find ways to squeeze their sites to the top of google ranked results to make more money, content be damned.

So the idea of empowering individuals to bypass this ranking system and "re-rank" results based seems intriguing.  Now having said that, i agree with broken85 that in fact google does (and has always done) a damn good job of ranking results.  That's one of the reason they beat out the competition is that they do such a damn good job of putting relevant finds up top.  So i'm not sure if such a tool is needed YET.

On the other hand, the temptation for google to start messing with result rankings to increase the scores of pages containing adsense, etc., and if they ever go in that direction, it would be nice to have a way to counter it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version