Slashdot Mirror
Google Unveils Search Options and Google Squared
CWmike writes "Saying that its users are becoming increasingly sophisticated, Google has unveiled a list of new search technologies geared to help users 'slice and dice' their Google search results, along with a new tool to help them cull information instead of Web pages. Marissa Mayer, vice president of Google's Search Products, said of Search Options in a blog post, 'We have spent a lot of time looking at how we can better understand the wide range of information that's on the Web and quickly connect people to just the nuggets they need at that moment.' Google Squared, set to be released to users as part of its Google Labs program later this month, pulls up information from different sites and presents it in an organized manner."
No thanks; wake me up when they come out with the "Google n*log(n)" version.
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
Culling data and presenting context-aware results is something that Wolfram is working on too.
Wolfram, a genuine genius, against a company full of above-average engineers. It's a tossup as to who came up with this idea first.
I wish Google had the ability to search for regular expressions and exact word matching. Searching for exact words or things that contain other symbols than letters is unfortunately very hard with Google and so sometimes it's useless in situations where it could have been so powerful.
This is an interesting take on the process of searching. In the past I thought good searching required training or insight, but this line of thinking - putting the onus on the search provider - is bold and interesting.
Will Google offer the traditional "colander with wires attached" USB device to read our minds and ignore what we type into the search box? If so, it better be free or people will complain.
Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
... would be the most important in my opinion of "user sophistication", a lot of times google will pull a lot of sites quite frankly should be able to be punished by users by users beign able to filter them out of their search results.
That might cause google to pause (ad revenue) but personally there's a lot of google manipulation and I'd love it if users could simply FILTER their results but NOT be able to change them and then let google study which sites are blocked or not to get an idea of how clueles (cluefull) their userbase is
Has anyone else noticed google's search results are a little too focused, or personalized? I am finding that useful search results that I had clicked on that were only tangenially related no longer come up when I search under the identical terms a second time. While this is good in most cases, I'd like a way to switch off this "focused laser" approach and open up my results more broadly without having to dig past the first 10 pages of results. I feel like google is so specific that I either find my result in the first three results or not at all these days. I feel like I am missing out on the wonders of finding cool stuff that you didn't know existed, since the results are too good and almost never off topic.
moox. for a new generation.
Google is just giving us an easier way to find pr0n on the tubes.
Is setting my "safe search" to off and will see you in the morning.
lets say you want to research Bulls-Pistons series in 1988 and you decide to use a squared which effectively parses and gets the data you want from Basketball-reference or one of those. Those sites will not get any page hits...
The future of search relies upon better parameters for the search.
Almost all searches are time-sensitive, but some are more time sensitive than others. When I'm looking for information about a piece of software the forum post from five years ago may or may not be relevant.
When I'm looking for information about the thinnest watch to buy, reading about a watch made over 30 years ago isn't appropriate.
Context is the big problem in search. The time sensitivity is one context. Product attributes is another. You can't (with the partial exception of Newegg and similar searches) search item properties in most cases. If you're buying a set of headphones not all headphones list their specs nor in the same way. There are a lot of other products besides headphones.
Sometimes the basic context is spot on, but it's still useless: a forum post of someone with the same question/problem I have, but it was never answered.
If you're considering a google plex to be analogous to a googolplex, then your post is wrong. A googolplex is 10^googol, not googol^googol.
...(perl-style) regular expressions? Or at least allowing to search for non-alphanumeric characters?
Their search interface is a huge step backward from what old engines like HotBot offered.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Saying that its users are becoming increasingly sophisticated, Google has unveiled a list of new search technologies geared to help users 'slice and dice' their Google search results, along with a new tool to help them cull information instead of Web pages.
(emphasis mine)
And ten minutes after they release this for real, they get sued by thousands of websites claiming that they're circumventing their ad income or whatever by giving viewers an option to get the data without going to the website and thus not see the ads.
I mean, that's what the AP's whining about, right?
Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
Or does the image of Johnny 5 from the movie Short Circuit come to mind when thinking of Google?
"Need more input!!!!!!"