Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Are There Any Search Engines Left That Don't Try To Think For Me?
An anonymous reader writes: As a programmer especially, I'm becoming increasingly unhappy with Google searches. They try very hard to present me with what they think I'm searching for instead of what I'm actually searching for. This issue mostly shows up when searching error messages, obscure type and function names and stuff like that. What I think though, is that I only notice the issue when searching for stuff I know a lot about, namely programming, but my queries get distorted when I'm searching for just about anything, I just don't know enough about the subject to notice. Are there any alternative search engines left that don't think they know better than me what I'm looking for and just search for my phrase, like in the 2000s?
Searching for exact strings is an option with Google, but what search engines are the most hands-off to start with?
http://www.atlasify.com/
Atlas at least thinks differently. As I understand it, rather than feed you a zillion links to the same data, it attempts to find your data, and related data. I'm not real sure how good, or how bad that is, but it's different.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
That usually does improve things, but not always. I often still get results as if I hadn't used any quotes at all, even though exact matches do exist and are displayed further down. And even a "+" in front of a word often gives sites that don't contain the word at all. Tip for Google, if someone writes "+" in front of a word, that really really really means that they really really want that word to actually appear on the page. Really. I'd rather get no results at all than a bunch of sites that don't contain the word.
Well, for example, if you get something like
Terminating app due to uncaught exception 'NSInvalidArgumentException', reason: '-[UINavigationController setList:]: unrecognized selector sent to instance 0x6a33840'
You can search for "Terminating app due to uncaught exception" NSInvalidArgumentException "unrecognized selector sent to instance"
(In this case, the search actually does appear to work correctly)
Usually, just copying and pasting some static part of the error message is quite helpful since others will have pasted the exact same words in some help forum.
The plus doesn't work very well anymore, half the result pages simply don't contain the word. They seem to use this as an indication that that word is slightly more important but not actually required. Which can be quite infuriating when you are searching for a specific site you know contains that word.
I think Google needs a slider bar that sets how "loosey goosey" it gets with your terms... so when I'm not getting what I want, I can go broader, or narrower. I'll even let 'em have the name... loosey goosey.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
I agree with AC. The comments by grimmjeeper and Spazmania here are bizarre.
The fact that "." has been used a wildcard in Kleene grammars, and used in regular expressions, is irrelevant.
There is nothing in Google's query instructions that suggests that search strings in quote are regular expressions, or is a Kleene grammar of any sort, or that a period is even a wildcard. It explicitly states that the asterisk is a wild card, no mention of a period.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Right click the bar and click "Edit Search Engines"
You can't modify the default Google one, but you can add another Google one and set it to default. Then simply change the search string to:
"{google:baseURL}search?q=%s&{google:RLZ}{google:originalQueryForSuggestion}{google:assistedQueryStats}{google:searchFieldtrialParameter}{google:bookmarkBarPinned}{google:searchClient}{google:sourceId}{google:instantExtendedEnabledParameter}{google:omniboxStartMarginParameter}{google:contextualSearchVersion}ie={inputEncoding}&tbs=li:1"
Once set as default anything searched through the omnibar will default to a verbatim search.
Google, seriously, when are you going to fix this?
It is fixed.
Google spends a lot of effort on optimizing search and has very sophisticated and effective metrics for tracking what works well and what doesn't. The thing is that you don't search like 99.99% of people search, and so the feedback loop optimizes away from you and towards others. Another poster above mentioned that it's better when signed in... I don't know if that's actually true, but Google does do some degree of search personalization, so it makes sense.
I find actually get very good results from Google, but I've changed the way I search. 20 years ago I learned to create very precise queries, with + and - to force and trim queries, omitting conjunctions and other common words that I knew weren't indexed anyway, etc. I don't do that any more. What works better these days, I find, is just to type a plain English question. For example, I just pulled up my Google search history, and here are some of my searches from today. Notably, not a single one of my searches required going to the second page of results and nearly all of them gave me the answer I was looking for as the top link.
"convert camelcase to underscore-separated with emacs" -- Got me immediately to a stackoverflow post that told me about the string-inflection package, available on MELPA.
"Can I use a heat pump to balance temperature between rooms?" -- My home office (I work from home) is perpetually hotter than the rest of the house, so I wondered if I could put a heat pump through the wall. Turns out, probably not. I'll investigate a fan instead.
"octal format string for printf" -- I didn't recall %o. Duh.
"example code for sha256 with openssl" -- Got me exactly what I wanted.
"how effective are hate crime laws" -- They appear to have no measurable effect on the rate of hate crime commission, though they arguably send a positive social signal.
"how to break on memory write in gdb" -- "watch"
"how to set gcm nonce length with openssl evp api" -- What a nasty hack that is, but it does work.
"trim whitespace from variable in bash" -- use tr
"bash tee to two pipes" -- redirect to a subshell
"942-Memory Training Error" -- Ugh, I think one of the DIMMs in my workstation is bad. Tech support is shipping me a replacement.
I only had the one error message to search for, but that's typical of my strategy. I don't try to craft an ideal query, I just paste the whole damned thing and 99% of the time I get an answer. Or at least more people complaining about the same problem.
I think a lot of the complaints about the change in search engine is from people who are still trying to use modern search engines they way they used them in 2000. Don't. Don't carefully craft your queries, just type a question, or paste a big pile of related text. That's what the masses do, so that's what Google optimizes for.
(Disclaimer: I work for Google, but not on search and don't know much about how it actually works.)
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.