Slashdot Mirror

Sometimes I have found it useful to go to Dogpile

It basically uses all search engines and lists your search accordingly. While google can be picky sometimes, I have found it to be better than most anything else. I have to admit I still use altavista a lot for media searches however.

Vox

I have just tried Kazaa Lite on various other search engines and meta search engines, and without fail they return at least one of the forbidden 8 sites that Google removes:

Altavista

Webcrawler

Teoma

Dogpile

Obviously not a comprehensive effort (I have a 3yr old son to entertain right now and that's much more important!), but it leads to the conclusion that either the complainant thinks the world revolves around Google OR the other sites haven't checked their mail yet!

As others have pointed out, the genie is out of the bottle and so semi-hiding the links is going to be pointless. I loved the written up DMCA complaint--putting the list of banned sites on it is kind of like having an English test question that says: Write down the correct spelling of following word: 'incomprehensible'? .

In other words, I'm a geek with broad interests.

A point about Google (much rather Dogpile-- get all the engines at once). What would it matter if I had used it? As I tell my kids all the time, the point isn't knowing all the answers, but knowing how to find them. Whether you use the web or the library, the point is to learn by looking for the answers, not learning facts by rote. I know the stuff I know because I find it interesting, such as Victoria and Victory, or why standard rail gauge is standard rail gauge.

yeah real good

Many other average Joes use and prefer other search engines too.

So what's my point? Hmmm... I forgot.

Try dogpile.com They have multiple returns.

It is well understood that the more times you see an image, the more likely you are to purchase its related product when you are wandering down the store aisles, wondering what to purchase. You've had the moment when you're standing in front of seven different brands of raisin brans, and you opt for one or another, little calculating that the one you purchased was simply imprinted upon your brain more times in recent advertising.

Google strides like a valiant and noble knight, a Don Quixote on a mission from heaven, to clear the mindscape of all those lurching, fragmented thoughts: "buy me!" "buy me!" "buy me!"

Like a gift from another universe, where things are cleaner, and evaluated by merit rather than popularity, Google presents an elaborate algorithm for sorting websites into fields of clarity. So insightful is their methodology, other larger search engines have bowed to this upstart. Even the mighty Yahoo, the first big engine on the 'net, has Google under the hood. So do a dozen other search engines, and thousands of sites who have turned their proprietary search functions over to the agile Google churner. AltaVista, Lycos, metacrawlers, and a few other great ones keep the American principle of competition solid, yet here we behold the miracle of Google.

We programmers watched Google come from behind, for we needed a relevance-based engine long before anyone else did: we had to have it so we could put it in the hands of others who needed our services; we were developers: we knew the information was out there, and were willing to spend hours tracking it down. Somewhere along the way, we'd stumble across this small search engine called Google, and discover that it turned up amazingly relevant searches, time and time again. No advertising. Quick.

So we bookmarked it, then we earmarked it, and finally we began to deliver the most precious kind of advertising which can be earned: we told our friends about it. And we delighted in the lack of advertising. Truly a geek's machine; sleek and relevant.

We watched the Internet bubble come crashing down around its own self- exuberance; we all know at least one programmer humbled by the rapid withdrawal of venture capital.

And so we watch Google carefully now, knowing that it is still bearing fruit for its venture capital investors, yet also knowing that our economy is continuing to draw inward, and as carefully as we form our sentences regarding the future of our welfare... we hold our breath when we visit Google each day for its wealth of free, friendly, and advertising-free three billion interrelated facets of information.

We watched Google handle the September 11 tragedy, worried that it might spark them into becoming a news portal, since their cache ability made them compete with sites like CNN which were swamped with 50,000 hits per second... and we saw Google come out cleanly, building on the crisis in a noble, not-capitalizing-on-the-crisis, manner. Now you can visit Google and find current information; it's a portal, yet ever so quietly, since there are no advertisements. Portals have become synonymous with a barrage of advertising, so what do we call this gallant creature who will not stoop to capitalism?

It's just a humble search engine: A search engine which points the way into a future with a clean mindscape. We may not all make it there; spammers prove that they'll come into such a future kicking and screaming for attention, and since we know that we all have to arrive together or else we none of us can arrive, we tolerate them.

Yes, we hold our breath each time we visit Google, lest they make that sad plunge into our noisy world instead of rising above it. And we are continually surprised by the improvements which they are making. These are not trivial improvements, simple cosmetic additions; one by one they have expanded our notion of how powerful a search engine can be, how it can nimbly reach into the deepest crevices of the Internet and produce a slew of relevant information on obscure topics. Search within groups. Search for images. Search only for images which are wallpaper sized from sites in Europe and are black and white.

The essence of the Internet, the information revolution, has somehow been bestowed upon the novel minds working for Google. We look at their job offerings, and yearn for the day when we can deserve such benevolence as to work for Google. Certainly only the best of the best work for Google (or id). They play hockey in their parking lots, and eat catered food every day. Ah, there we begin holding our breath. We like to have fun at work, but too much fun is a sign of venture capital.

How do they do it, how do they keep going, and going, and going without losing integrity by selling ads or trying to do too much? Google quietly inspires us to consider a world without advertising. Oh, they take advertising alright, yet look at it: it's extremely targeted, intended to be relevant to the searcher. With a thick black line separating advertising and content. No advertiser images. None of this irrelevant barrage. Looking for a new ISP? Here's twenty links, and over here in the corner, ten folks who've paid us money to be listed when you search for ISPs. Google drew a distinct line between the advertiser content and their own content. And they steadfastly looked toward our needs when they tolerated no images. Text- based. Get the information into the hand of the gentleman while he needs it, and trust that he will come back later with a thank-you note in hand.

Well, here is one thank you note. I hold my breath each time I visit Google, and I use it extensively, and have for years. I was Googling when Google wasn't yet cool, and I'm delighted to see it surviving. I hope they remain solid in their condition of accepting no image-based advertisements, and pray they will continue to inspire us with clarity on the concept of what it means to serve.

The cache concept, now firmly entrenched in the way we conceive of the Internet, is perhaps the greatest aspect of the information revolution: You once published a site, but now it is defunct. Or your site is presently being slashdotted or DOS'd. No problem, visit the Google cache for the site, and there's your info, as clear and sometimes quicker than the original version. The folks at archive.org have taken this idea and run with it, yet I must admit the first time I realized how profoundly differently we were going to be processing information in the future came when I understood what Google was doing with their cache. I prayed then, and the prayer was answered, that the cache would not be shut down because of re-publishing rights issues. Now Google has enough momentum that it would take an act of Congress to shut off their caching.

Take a look at Google. Unlike most companies with bold pretty mission statements hiding inner corruption, Google somehow matches their ten operating principles with immediate proof. They do it right; they work hard for their money.

Using Dogpile, which searches many of the popular search engines either have no matches or send me to somewhat unrelated stuff. (Wilshire 5000. Powerman 5000. Why?)

But on Google, I get 14 Slashdot post links, which seems a lot more relevant to the original search terms.

I guess sites like MP3.com have paid the other engines quite well. Gotta love Google and their text-matching-only searching.

Using Dogpile, which searches many of the popular search engines either have no matches or send me to somewhat unrelated stuff. (Wilshire 5000. Powerman 5000. Why?)

But on Google, I get 14 Slashdot post links, which seems a lot more relevant to the original search terms.

I guess sites like MP3.com have paid the other engines quite well. Gotta love Google and their text-matching-only searching.

at one point, webcrawler was a good search engine. There was also Yahoo and excite and altavista and all of them together, dogpile (and more, of course). Popularity has skipped from one to the next (though yahoo has been more portal than search engine, with lists and reviewed sites and such, news and stocks and groups and maps...) And one search engine to rule them. that would be google, right? google seems to be a sort of ending place, which could say something about innovation on the web. Or it could just mean that what is popular is also a Very Good Thing.

The two pages of this article don't seem to be well-related. The first page looks at google-like search engines - Wisenut and Teoma, while the links in the second page fall into a different category altogether. Lasoo doesn't look like anything more than a glorified yellow pages, CURE looks like any other research database out there, and Vivisimo is the least creative of them all, being nothing more than another Dogpile. The first two look promising, but the others are just the same ideas churned out again.

Plastic just ran a thread regarding an article on the subscription side of Inside.com. It was about an as yet unpublished book by UK physicist Sir Martin Rees titled "Our Final Century?" as of the date I checked, there was nothing to be found on that book on the three search engines that combined have never let me down before: GOOGLE (Web & groups), RAGING (secondary web search) & DOGPILE (Print news). Part of the the problem is likely to be how current the story was, so my back up was to hit the big UK media sites BBC.co.uk, thetimes.co.uk, etc. but these also drew blanks.

I think you may be on to something. Take a look at this quote from the article (my emphasis added): Dr David Cantor, director of the Psychological Services Institute in Atlanta, Georgia, who has treated patients for memory and attention problems for more than 20 years, said: "Many experts believe information overload is making it difficult for some people to absorb new information, as they have reached a limit of what they can store in their brains. These people forget things because they were too distracted to absorb them in the first place."

Is there such an organization? I've just done a bunch of queries on google and dogpile.com and bigyellow.com , but if they exist, I can't find 'em! Are there any /.'ers from that area who can confirm/deny that there is such an organization?

Heh. Maybe they're hoping we'll enjoy the article, but not remember it? ;)

It strips the crap from the engines it searches and gives you results from the 'portal' types (like Yahoo) as well as the 'pure' search engines like Google.

The only thing I use Yahoo for is their TV listings.

I have been using DEjA for a while and in the past year or so, the quality exponentially went down.

So now I am looking for alternatives? A search on google doesn't reveal much.

Can people name any similar services that exists? A poster mentioned dogpile. ANy others?

I would really like to see GOOGLE getting into this.

/LinuxLover

it's pretty much the whole freakin thing :)

-Jon

First, search Dogpile for "C3450A" and for "4100DX". The first gets you almost nothing. The second mostly gets you info on the Zenith Z-Station 4100DX/2, so you try throwing an "HP" in with it.

With creative interpretation of the couple of UseNet postings in German and Dutch, I found out that:

The Ethernet controller is an AMD Lance.

It has an IPX or NetBIOS boot rom. You might want to download EtherBoot or some such and befriend someone with an EPROM burner, however...

Someone already tried that and can't get the network card to see the network.

One webpage has an awesome bunch of info, though. It's called the HP Windows Client, it can take a 2.5" HDD, it can do BootP and it has a 1MB CL5430 display controller.

Happy hacking!

Hmmm.. a "medieval plant"? There aren't too many of those, most plant genera exist for longer periods of time.
The Mandrake root is a focus of superstition and mystery in European and Asian cultures from the dawn of recorded history to the present. Supposedly this is because the root looks like a human being, and in fact this may have once been true. It's occasionally true today, but all the mandrakes I've ever seen had more than two legs. On the other claw, the crabs in Shimonseki strait all seem to have the faces of drowned Samurai on their backs - because the ones that don't have such markings are eaten by the local fisherfolk. Perhaps most mandrakes were once bifurcate, and human gathering practices have selected away from any strong resemblance to a human profile. I dunno.

Now, the real definition of Mandrake, for linux geeks - Mandrake is a shortish, grizzled oldtimer with a slight accent (when speaking English) a pleasant manner, and a high degree of technical expertise. He puts out the GNU/Linux Mandrake distribution, which was originally based on Red Hat but has diverged recently due to the incredible number of advances made in the Open Source software community - Red Hat and Mandrake have differing ideas (hooray for that!) about what should be in their distributions, and we the consumers of pre-packaged GNU/Linux are the winners in that we have two choices for high quality distros.

Go learn to use a search engine, and you can find out a lot more about mandrake roots, linux distributions, and related topics. Start at Dogpile, which is a meta-search engine, and that will provide you with links both to your topics of research and other search engines.

--Charlie
We were all newbies once. Except me, of course. I was born with a silicon chip up my nose.

The Meta-Search site DOGPILE has a Usenet option. It sends your search to Deja's current database, Altavista/Remarq's database, and Deja's archive database.

Their sister site Metacrawler also provides an interface for Deja's database.

I've been trying to figure out why AskJeeves gets so much press. It's probably just the name, and the idea of a natural language query. It's certainly not because it works. I've used it many, many times and I don't know if I've ever gotten an answer to my question. (Why did I use it? Really just to see if the stupid thing would work.) It's nice to see the aggregated results, but other sites (like Dogpile) work better and don't frame the results like AJ does.

All in all, a good idea that still doesn't work too good. -db

Search engine: Dogpile Web Catalog found 3,710 documents.
The query string sent was word lists

Displaying first 10 documents.

1. word lists - 10,000,000 words in over 130 categories word lists - click here for the largest archives on the internet www.wordlists.com - TouchPlanet Communications - CA

Clicking through and it is soon clear that wordlists.com went out of the word list business and into the adult content index business...

1. According to the FAQ you can't officialy do more than 10 as a default. But you can do up to a hundred for any subsequent search (number 1-100 can be plugged into the URL if you don't want to search in units of 10,30, or 100. You can always create your own local search form page if you want to start with number other than 10 (but still less than 101)

1. if you need more than 2,000 (20x100) results, you may want to try MetaFind As far as I know they don't limit their results, though they may be limited by the search engines they themselves use.

1. I use AltaVista or DogPile, which does a metasearch of both the Altavista and Deja (old & current) Usenet databases.