Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Putting Google to the Test

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the time-is-of-the-essence dept.

Big Nothing writes "Google has built its reputation on being the fastest and most accurate way to find information. But is the internet really the quickest way to access facts - and get them right? The Guardian puts Google to the test against more old-fashioned methods."

13 of 441 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah but it was fast enough..... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To win radio trivia call in contests a few years ago. Using Google to answer trivia just like in Ghost World.

    1. Re:Yeah but it was fast enough..... by dasmegabyte · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In college we used to have a group call-in radio trivia show called the "mad trivia party." The panel gives a series of really tough questions; when you call in you can answer up to three of them. For every question you get right, you may ask a new question. You get a point for answering, and a point for stumping the panel, for a max of 6 points per call.

      Because the panel were always obscenely up on standard trivia, we had to ask very cunning questions or we'd never win anything. For a while, the studio had no internet connection, so the last three points were almost a lock. Google for some obscure fact, like the number of canals in Antananarivo, and you get the point.

      When they finally got a PC, it became tougher. Anything that could be googled for in the time it took to take a call would be caught. So, we started working broken into smaller teams. One team on a PC on google. The other team as runners in the university library. Walkie-talkies connected the two who then passed the answers and new questions along to a dialer who would try and get a position in the phone queue.

      Yeah, I know. Crazy set up for a trivia game, eh? But it was worth it. Besides being a very fun way to spend a nerdy evening, the prizes were pretty cool, and the players a fairly unusual breakdown of college goths, high school skatepunks, idie rock losers and retired people with nothing better to do.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  2. Time to get to the Library? by stlthVector · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Great comparison but they don't take into account how long it takes to get to the library, phone charges, etc. For me, 15 minutes on Google is faster than 30 seconds at the library.

  3. Interesting but... by hal2814 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This article assumes that the person looking for information already knows other means of finding information. I didn't know about the Who's Who book and even if I did, I might not have one handy. I think these results are a little less than accurate for most people. Also, the author directly phones some people. What if I don't know exactly who to phone? I think Google will win in that case.

    1. Re:Interesting but... by NexusTw1n · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "I didn't know about the Who's Who book and even if I did, I might not have one handy. "
      I find it slightly disconcerting that we may be producing a generation that has no research skills bar Google.

      When I went to school we were taught library skills, is that still the case, or do teachers assume you are all going to hit google?

      Google does not trawl the entire internet, it barely touches it in fact, relying on it for your information, is like relying on the Discovery channels for your education or one station only for your news.

      Besides, half the fun of researching in the library is the irrelevant but interesting information you stumble across as you browse!
      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Interesting but... by Swashedbuckles · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Teachers are trying to combat this now by requiring sources other than the internet. My last year of high school we were only allowed two or three internet sources. The rest had to be dead-tree books, magazines, newspapers, etc.

      What I find even more disconcerting are students who put down "www.google.com" in their bibliography.

  4. The answer to your question... by ArbiterOne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... is YES. Books on, say, Napoleon, you can find in a library. But ever tried to find, say, ten pages, or even a paragraph, about Napoleon? Especially in a 1200+ page book, or several? Ever tried looking something up in a card catalog? Or finding one sentence in a huge book? The answer to the question in the article is a definite YES.

  5. Biased? by toesate · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The article report compare between Google, Phone and Library.

    I think this is a biase comparison.

    In the phone and library search, it is assumed upon a narrowed subject or particular topic. Where the searcher knows where to look for the _authorative_ answer, for example the title of the particular book to get the answer.

    Overall, I think the winner is pretty inconclusive, but it still does shows that Google is a really good search engine - where you can actually find a reasonable result.

    --
    Hey, that's my password you are typing
  6. This all is a bit unrelevant... by dot-magnon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The methods all have their uses. I don't use google find old classical music scores, but I don't use the library to find recent news stories, software, and such. There's a use for all these things, and it's important to preserve it all.

    There's nothing that beats human interaction and direct knowledge in many cases, but people are not there all the time. If I had them right at me, I wouldn't need google. Google (and the library) is a compilation of what a bunch of people once knew, worked on, built further on, et cetera. Now, since it's impossible to reach these people, we wrote books. Books that we can read, to learn what people found out. That has it's value. Now, we can find the book, read about it, even read it, using google, or we could find other information rapidly that the library won't have for a long time - at least not before the next day's newspaper.

    After all, the library might even have their search engine against a GoogleServer in the back room :-)

    Final point: Cherish all sources of knowledge, and use them appropriately. That will give you the best results.

  7. Google Answers Researcher by skermit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a researcher with Google Answers and it's never a must that we use Google to answer questions that come in. Actually, for one-off's and questions which I know can be answered with a phone call or two, I won't even bother with the internet. Of course, then again, there was that one time I called over a hundred different restaurants to see who was serving on Christmas Day. Hah.

    --
    -Christopher Wu
    http://www.christopherwu.net/
  8. Google Is The Bomb.... by bobej1977 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I think it was a bit unfair in that the library and phone users seemed quite skilled at the use of those respective mediums, whereas a skilled Googler would easily be able to halve those times.

    I've often said that I'd have to quit programming if Google ever disappeared. I lean on it for information in the same way that excessively using a calulator will lead you to punching in 1 + 1. In fact, I'm so good at it that people sometimes think I'm a genius problem solver, when really it's just a matter of creative googling on an error message.

    --
    The meek shall inherit the earth, in 3 by 6 plots. - Lazerus Long
  9. Re:Not versus, with by DroopyStonx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not quite sure I agree with that.

    I first had access to the internet back in '96 when I was a sophomore in High School. I've written TONS of research papers since then, even more so in college. Using the internet to look up information not only returns better (and more) information than the library would have, but it's faster. For example, you could look up ATP in an encyclopedia, but if you saw "nucleotide" and didn't know what that was.. guess what? Flip to Nucleotide.. look it up.. etc etc. as opposed to clicking a single link provided on MOST pages that explain ATP. Faster, more efficient data retreival.

    Library resources take up WAY too much time, and they aren't always guaranteed to have what you're looking for. It's a flat out waste of time. I'm not saying "burn all the books", but there is absolutely NO point in using the library for research as opposed to the internet.

    For example, I had to write a 10 page paper comparing and contrasting Dostoyevsky and Joseph Conrad. The professor wanted us to use the LIBRARY to look up magazine articles that other journalists wrote which discussed either of these two authors. I wanted to stab my teacher in the eye for that one. I saw how much time other students wasted in the library trying to find their information, and I really can't say I understand how exactly the library is BETTER.

    We had two weeks straight where our entire class was in the Library researching this. Let me tell you, it's not fun trying to find resources that 20 other students are trying to search for at the same time. Needless to say, I left early every time we went down there. A few days before the report was due, I used google and found all the articles I'd ever need for this paper in little under an hour.

    When all was said and done, I got an A on my paper. What'd it cost me? An hour of research, which is about a 10th of what most other people spent on it (there were a few others who also used Google).

    This is what I don't understand about professors. They're so hard up for you to use the library, but there's really no point in it. If my assignment is to compare and contrast two authors, wtf difference does it make if I use the library vs. Google? It's like those math teachers in the 60's who frowned upon calculators and insisted you use your "handy, tried and true" slide rule.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
  10. Free BEER using Google! by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Back when Ricochet was around, I would go into local pubs in Atlanta on trivia nights, the would offer something like $20 certificates or more for the winner of the contest. With Ricochet (192kbps wireless internet), a PDA, and Google, I could walk in late - get a perfect score on the questions I answered and eat and drink free.

    Ricochet was around $70 amonth, but at 20-60 bucks a week it more than paid for itself. Best thing, there were no rules that said you couldn't access the internet. People were amazed at my trivia knowledge.