Slashdot Mirror

They could always use the swedish translation for "one less than a googlewhack"

I found this without Mountweazels in the week Bing launched using which are sets of search words that only return one result.

I was getting the same URL back from Google, which had had a decade or more to build its index, as I was from Bing, which was very new.

So I figured that Bing was taking my search query, feeding it to Google and building their index with Google's results. Not surprising really.

It's harder to do now. If you can find two words unquoted that result in one result it's a googlewhack like this one was before Google found "eltiguan parainaugurarme" on this page and made it the second result.

BTW, my first google search was "war" and it returned something equivalent to "Your search term is too common to return a meanignful result. Narrow your search." Today it returns about 974 million results. It was long ago...

Oh, and about the dolphins, bummer. But why are mammals more important than other non-mammalian species that have gone extinct? Because we're more closely related to them? That's rather self-centered, don't you think?

If you don't like Google go to another website, but sooner or later you will realise that Google is god when it comes to internet search, despite Yahoo! claiming to be bigger.

Why hate Google?
Too Slow (unlikely),
No results (people are constantly looking for a 1 resulted search GoogleWhack),
Bad GUI (it's clean and simple),
No custom page layouts (check Google IG).

Come on people, Google has everything you need and more, why hate it?

There's already a search engine that compares 2 pieces of data.. it's called googlewhack http://www.googlewhack.com/

http://www.googlewhack.com/

Not quite - fails Rule #1.

A Googlewhack is a two-word Google query that returns exactly one result.

The term you're looking for is probably Googlebombing, which refers to deliberately placing keywords and links on multiple domains to boost a site's PageRank. Originally, Googlebombs were pranks or in good fun, like a search for weapons of mass destruction.

Now "Googlebombing" is being expanded by some to include manipulating PageRanks for commercial ends. I'll leave it to the armchair etymologists of Slashdot to decide if that is a correct use of the term.

Feisty Dunnart is a Google Whack! (But will probably not last for long :)

Actually, there's an upside to the advent of gibberish becoming more widespread in spam: it helps with ideas for googlewhacking...

Sure strained silicon is great, but the real advance was the world's smallest colander.

I am *so* glad I wasn't the only one who thought of that sort of "straining". I read the article and *still* had to take a beating with a cluestick before I figured out that they were talking about the other meaning of "strain". I guess I was thinking about upcoming Christmas dinner.

On a side note, I figured infinitesimal colander would be close to a Googlewhack, but instead it brought up yet another bizarre collection of Googlecrap fake links. "If the unempirical hot wire foam cutter runs some gantry at an infinitesimal colander, then another hand baggage plagues." WTF?

That's still 15 too many search results to qualify.

there is really no such thing as "speaker bracelet" or "candle truck".

GoogleWhacking is a "game" (for want of a better word) where you take two random words and try to get one, and only one result on Googe.

"We have to provide information in all the languages our clients speak," said Jerry Jelusich, a procurement specialist for the county Department of Human Services, which serves about 60,000 mental health clients.

Okay... I did a Google on "Jerry Jelusich" (note quoting) and it returns only one result. However, when looking at the (strangely small) PDF document the Google link points to, the twoword "Jerry Jelusich" doesn't appear at all. Looking at Google's PDF-to-HTML conversion results, however: Google search on Jerry Jelusich result, gives the text "These terms only appear in links pointing to this page: jerry jelusich" at the top.

So if the quoted text only appears in links pointing to this PDF... and yet the PDF is the only result for this quoted text... argh, I think my brain is broken *grin*.

On the other hand, googling for "Franna Hathaway", (the other person quoted in the news story) gives heaps of Google results, most of which seem relevant.

Anyway, it's a strange story already, I just thought that some might find this sort of odd Googleresult to be interesting. ;-)

Pete.

PS. It's not a valid Googlewhack if the twoword is quoted, apparently. Oh well.

You mean... You mean... a Google just for pr0n???

Oh, you mean that googlewhack!

Erm... Hem... Uh, never mind. Carry on.

Two of my brothers and our families just spent an hour googlewhacking! Fun for the whole family, plus you get to see your name in lights!

Also, finding Googlisms are fun. That is trying to find two words in the same search query that where the query only returns one result.

Swing and a miss. The term you're looking for is googlewhack. "oligotrophic" and "festering" is a good example, for one.

This is a difficult question to answer, but the answer is full of totally unrelated semi-googlewhacks and curious links.

If you think Google is concerned about the loss of ad revenue from the API format, you have forgotten what Google said about the alternative of "parsing the html".

Don't know about you, but I doubt the ads silently dumped during in the html parser phase are doing the advertiser much good. Google could charge more for their ads since they would know that html parser "ad bypass" would not be occuring en masse, since any intelligent googler would write to the API.

Beside, why shouldn't the API support ads also, think about the API ads being interpreted as quality hits when the API specifically requests the ad content.

Google should also rack up savings on CPU utilization, especially for Google Games or GoogleWhacking.

And, of course, Googlewhacking.