Print

Print


>>>Bob --

That's me.  

>>>First, I tried your search "WDL AND blog" and was told that "AND" was unnecessary as it is included by default as an operator in every search.This is what I had previously thought was the case, but I was worried, as a result of your post saying how users do not know how to use Google properly, that I had been missing something. However I was not missing anything. Perhaps you should refrain from criticizing people as an aggregate and me in particular until you properly check your own information.>>>

Yes it does indeed say AND is "not required." You can also use "WDL + Blog" to drill down a search; the "-" can be used to exclude terms.  

By the way, I was not referring to any one specific person, just people in general. I thought you would get that. So for the record, I am not talking about you, just people in general. Interview a hundred people on the street that say they use the net and chances are they use Google and only simple search terms. Not specific structures, terms, and operators.

Fact is, the majority of Google searches done by those I know, are done without using the advanced search box or special operators. Most folks, certainly, do not know how to search things not indexed by Google and perhaps it does not matter. Lots of stuff is not accessible using a Google search by the way.

I think it is safe to say the majority of users are not savvy "Googlers." Google certainly understands this is a problem and you will see changes in the upcoming months and years. This is not a slam; not everyone should be expected to know everything there is to know about Google. Heck, only one out of ten I talk to know anything about Usenet. I often use a simple search when I know the site is popular and likely to be returned.

One can find out all sorts of stuff on the net, if they look. For example, I found a aerial image of your building with a relatively simple search of the "Sporkworld" registration information and TerraServer. Apparently, it is a school or apartment. RELAX, I am NOT a stalker; NYC scares me.

>>>Secondly -- far more importantly -- Google obviously returns different
results to different users, at least assuming you are not lying about the
results you got. >>>

Never assume, or suggest, or imply that I am lying because what I post is easy to confirm. I found out about you using Google, so it is easy to check up on people and what they say. Do not like what I post, then challenge me to prove it.

Anything I post is subject to comment and debate. You can always Google me and determine how consistent I am when I post. You can also learn what I am going to say if you Google.  

Yes, I did post a few large numbers. To be clear, they were not search results, just typical numbers of results we have all seen. The point is, if your site is (made up number warning) (oh, and not you personally, when I say you) number 345,678 out of 768,767 returned results, the typical surfer is not likely to visit half a million sites to find your site. When people learn how to properly Google, they will be happier.

>>>(I wonder what their algorithm is, and what determines the
differences or whether there is a probabilistic aspect. >>>

At one time you could find out more about how Google "Googles." Probably still the case. They filed for a patent on their algorithm, so the info is publicly available information. It is a large document. Also, there can be a big difference if you Google from a page not strictly hosted by Google. Many sites carry a Google search dialog box.

>>>I don't think they have any way of knowing who exactly is using their search engine -- if the user doesn't log in to a Google service that has membership -- so I don't think it can depend on who the user is precisely, and in any case if Google
were giving me personalized results, presumably it would bring up the WDL
blog as the first result because each time I search for "wdl blog" that is
where I click next, assuming the choice is available... Google could of
course know the IP address users came from or what site they were on last,
as this information is carried by the HTTP service and is available to
server-side scripting languages such as ASP or PHP that Google might be
using behind the scenes...):>>>

Google is up to all sorts of interesting things. You must dig deep to find out what they might be doing, however. Depending on the conspiracy sites you visit, Google is up to all sorts of nefarious activities. Or so it seems, if you believe everything you read. Things like turning all IP addresses served over to the government and telling "them" what you searched for. I do not know if it is true and I do not care. Just one on many rumors.

One thing is for certain: they are a big deal and we all must deal with them until someone else comes along. There will always be someone else because there is so much at stake. For example, they suddenly decide they do not like guns, so they refuse to index gun sites. Or some wonk at Google decides not to index a site for religious reasons; the other side of the coin being someone decides to rank a site highly after being paid off. To be clear, I am not saying it happens, just no surprise if it does.  

>>>When _I_ searched "WDL AND blog" (and I also tried "wdl and blog" which I
believe is the same for Google but the variation was worth trying), the WDL
blog was not on the first page of results (I did not look at further pages).>>>

I use the "and" operator because of habit. However, (and you can try this yourself using your own name) when I type "Bob Maxey" into Google, I get a different set of results than I get when I search "Bob AND Maxey." The same thing will happen if I type "Harley Indian" and "Harley AND Indian."  

It is likely that Google makes incremental changes every week and in some cases, they might affect you and your expected results. DW the Google API and let us know.

>>>When I searched "wdl blog" which should have given identical results if it
is really true that the "AND" opertaor is included by default in every
search, I got slightly different results: the blog was the 9th out of 10
results on the first page returned. This is acceptable, but not a great
result since I believe many users only look at the first few results
returned. The first few results were a mixture of links having nothing to
do with our blog and links that referenced the blog but did not give a link
to it on the first page one got to, probably because these pages were from
discussions which happened before the blog was actually established.>>>

The typical user will not search through all pages of returned results. One can find all sorts of stats to suggest typical users only go so deep. I am not sure how accurate the stats are, but it seems likely from watching other users search the web.

One problem is the words that the blog owner uses and the same words used to describe unrelated sites you are not interested in. For example, we have a WDL blog, but we also need to consider the number of other blogs that use "WDL" in their name or in their content. I found a blogger dot com blog for the WDL Language.  

You can always expect to find results that are not to your liking. This is why the advanced search works well. Also, the "+" and the "-" operators If I type "Casein -milk" I find more sites about the decorative plastic with fewer milk-related results. Google offers other specialty search areas in you want specialized information.

>>>The anomalies in the Google results -- and the fact that my results were
different than yours -- are a major part of why I worry about the influence
Google is having on information retrieval in general and published research
in particular. As I was careful to point out, I know of no reason to blame
the Google corporation for this -- they have a reputation as corporate "good
citizens" and I don't believe that the problem is that their search engine
is deficient (it is pretty good and I would not seriously expect there to be
a better general purpose search engine) but rather that people are beginning
to rely on it as their unique research tool, displacing not only other
search engines but also conventional library research and the use of
professional reference librarians (I am not, nor have I ever been a
librarian, but I know a little about the profession, and I attended the
university where Dewey taught many years ago -- the Dewey who was
influential in library science and for whom the Dewey Decimal System was
named -- and many years later the graduate library school was closed down
because there were not enough applicants and funding to support it, despite
its position as one of the best library schools in the U.S.).>>>

In my opinion, a researcher needs to use tools other than Google. There are vast numbers of SEs on the web. Some pages and sites are buried in the so-called "invisible" web. If you type "plane crash database" into the search box, the returned results will be far different than if you type "Plane Crash." The use of the word "database" makes a big difference.  

Most people are not aware of the vast amounts of data exists on the web and will never be returned as part of a search result -be it a Google search or some other SE. Google is making it easier to do serious research. Visit their services page. Not perfect, but they are working on it. There are many specialties SEs for very specific searches as well. Not to mention the search engines that will find search engines.

>>>This Googlization of research is a dangerous trend, and one which relates to
"The Digital Life" in a broad sense, quite apart from questions about the
technology or business practices of the Google company, which is a narrower
subject. I point out the anomalies in Google results only as a concrete
example to show why we shouldn't rely on Google as our only source of
information, although we ought (as a society) to know for deeper reasons
than how easy it is to find the WDL blog that we shouldn't trust ourselves
to a single index into the world's vast information sources. We would be
wrong to rely on Google in the way which I fear is happening even if it were
such a perfect search engine that I could not find anything to criticize in
its functioning.>>>

In my OPINION, we need a few top dogs. We need services like Google to make it easy to find specific information in one place rather than to visit fifty different engines. I would like to see all web content indexed by Google.  

>>>P.S. I won't take the bait and get into a detailed fight about Microsoft,
complaining in detail about how their business practices are unfair to other
companies or (as is more relevant to me) how their practices have adversely
affected the process and diversity of digital interactive art, which is my
field (I have personally had my creative options seriously restricted by
Microsoft's business and technical decisions). >>>

Hey, you brought it up and I commented on your comment. Next time, do not post something you do not want to be discussed. In passing or not. I made my point and added "enough about that" Or some such, so I will not comment of big, evil MS. This list is not the place to debate MS and what it did or did not do.  

Bob  
… Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

**********

* Visit the Writing and the Digital Life blog http://writing.typepad.com
* To alter your subscription settings on this list, log on to Subscriber's Corner at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/writing-and-the-digital-life.html
* To unsubscribe from the list, email [log in to unmask] with a blank subject line and the following text in the body of the message: SIGNOFF WRITING-AND-THE-DIGITAL-LIFE