Which is why Google's separation between the different meanings of the word can be so helpful. Give it enough context to know the meaning that you are using and it will usually do a much better job of finding what you're looking for.
But I can't replicate it adding or removing words from a phrase as long as I put the phrase in quotes. It always seems to search for the exact phrase, though sometimes with punctuation in between.
Maybe I'm getting the short end of the stick in some A/B testing.
I've had searches where it does both adding words (fictional example: drops words becomes drops some words) and others where it excludes words (does the "missing: drops"). Usually it's on searches with words that have multiple meanings where the meaning I am searching for is the less common of them, stuff dealing with subject matter that is academic, etc.
Are you looking for an unlocked phone? Search for that instead. And yes, you're going to get carriers in most any search for purchasing cell phones because carriers sell a lot of cell phones.
That'd be somewhat understandable, except for the fact that only 2 of the 10 were in the right country.
AFAICT, they blithely ignore all the things that *used* to make it possible to actually give Google value - the Google-fu expressions, including most importantly +term and -term.
Umm, the + operator was deprecated in 2011. I don't exactly know what effect it has had since then. (It seems to do something, but it's highly unpredictable.)
Exactly the point, the "Google-fu" was the ability to use the operators (prior to being removed/depreciated) to get the results you needed. They're slowly stripping them out replacing them with guess work based on what is most likely wanted. The problem with "most likely" is that it must have some sort of popularity. The real hidden gems of the internet are simply lost and your ability to sift through the rest is compromised by what others have wanted.
I did a search the other day for LG G3 retailers... I tried dozens of variations, verbatim on, quotes, etc. I was given options in the US, UK, some Canadian cellphone carriers. In the end I had to go to Shopbot.ca to get Canadian companies selling the phone.
Use "Ask Jeeves" syntax: "where can i buy lg g3?" at google.
The first result came up as BestBuy. The second was an article literally entitled "Where can I buy LG's new superphone?" The third was a link to LG's website with a nice "Where to Buy" link.
I put in that exact search, which good god that's a lot to type, and the results I get are LG which lists where to buy from cell service providers (not retailers), BestBuy US, BestBuy Canada (closer) but again they are cell service sellers, Costco which is WirelessWave cell service sellers, an actual cell service provider, 5 reasons to buy via Forbes, CNET where to buy in America, the UK launch, Amazon.COM (not.ca which has it listed), and another article on why I should buy it.
Compare that to Shopbot where I type in "lg g3" and get what I wanted/searched for: Amazon.ca, DirectCanada, NCIX, Newegg.ca, etc. I also get multiple versions of the phone, pricing, and so on. Granted Shopbot is very specialized but until Google can interpret "where to buy" or that I am doing a shopping search vs a review search, etc then it needs to back off and let me tell it what to search for and stop guessing at it.
lol - it was out there, shopbot had indexed dozens of them. Google was doing exactly what you assumed, that I'd want to buy it from a cell service provider (retailers sell it for as little as $320 vs $699 for cell companies). As I stated, I tried dozens of searches not the phrase "lg g3 retailers". Google did find me the phone on amazon.com and amazon & ebay.co.uk but couldn't find it on amazon.ca despite knowing I'm Canadian. Shopbot, it was the first result because they didn't try to guess what I was looking for, they just searched what I put in.
I did a search the other day for LG G3 retailers... I tried dozens of variations, verbatim on, quotes, etc. I was given options in the US, UK, some Canadian cellphone carriers. In the end I had to go to Shopbot.ca to get Canadian companies selling the phone.
When the results are displayed go to Search Tools and change All Results to Verbatim
Only works in a very limited fashion and is incredibly annoying to have to search then click a few times to get it to search what I asked for in the first place. It also only works in certain types of searches, others don't have the verbatim option or you can only select one type of search tool at a time.
Tried them all. Bing does the exact same bullshit that Google does. duckduckgo's results are so similar and extremely limited that it's not really viable for anything but common searches. Dogpile is a pile, even for common searches.
Try enclosing your error output in quotation marks. That tells Google that you're looking for that phrase, not just that combination of words.
HAHAHAHA
Google regularly ignores the quotation marks, drops words inside them, fails to include them together... they've even started ignoring the - when you want to exclude something... I'll do something like -shop and it'll bring up domains with shop in it, in the title, and in the description
I have the same problem too... I hate the new search methodology. I liked some of the unobtrusive suggestions like "did you mean" but now days I have to fight with search get it to do my actual search and not some shorted/twisted guess of what most people want to find. Verbatim helps, a little, but the lack of +, the ignoring of - and " " along with the guess work is bordering on useless. I've tried a half dozen alternatives but they seem to have extremely limited indexes and the results are largely the same.
Location searching is another major problem... my ISP is Toronto based and I don't share location information. When this situation happens Google takes a guess based on the IP and will sometimes give Toronto results other times Montreal which means French. Other times it'll decide the street in Canada I want is actually in Asia or Europe and I just have to facepalm it.
These newfangled games are lame. I tried ET once, never again.
It's probably a good thing because the article is misinformed. It's not ALL titles and you don't play the disc. You put the disc in and will be given a version you can download for free (presumably recompiled for x86). The only problem is the initial compatibility list is very sparse at ~100 titles with "more being added" which could mean another handful or hundreds but doubtful that you'll get all you games - especially those they think they can re-monetize.
I don't trust Mozilla for a second but Chrome's idea of privacy is to pretend it doesn't exist... even if you block everything you can Chrome still has the ability to send data back as part of its core functionality. To my knowledge they haven't exploited this yet but it's only a matter of time.
Yeah, no kidding. [snip] This sounds like a feature nobody actually gives a damn about.
Mozilla, what happened to a lean, standards compliant, privacy focused browser?
A million times this. I really want to give up on Mozilla. They've lost their way and the designers rule the roost. I just don't have any better options. I'm never going closed source again and I'm not a fan of Chrome or Google's concept of privacy.
Tape is even less expensive, yet the mainstream moved away from it. A disk is just tape that's been wound up into a smaller space.
Tape is great for archival purposes where you're dumping/retrieving streams of data that can be stored sequentially. That's not exactly useful for the needs of an active HDD.
Spoiled brat. I remember buying RAM at $30 per meg. Before that the metric was pretty meaningless as we were happy with just a few kilobytes. $100 per TB for flash memory would have been a nerd's wet dream back then.
I remember those days too. The reality is though at this very moment I can get a platter drives at $0.03/GB so $0.70/GB does not seem attractive in the least. There are performance considerations and platter drives have fewer uses which is why I think a reasonable price should be $0.04-0.05/GB for NAND.
1) Not likely, the video is on SoundHound's YouTube channel - they're not hiding anything 2) I honestly don't know how they're processing it that fast... it likely isn't cloud based otherwise there would be a delay between upload/process/download... this seems nearly instant which means they either have an insane compression algorithm, a special microphone setup, or are running a local setup that improves speed beyond real world (ie: wifi with the server right next to them) 3) Yes, they repeat some of those phrases in their advertisement... while I'm sure they have some natural language logic, it's likely they're using common questions/web queries to optimize those answers... so while I doubt it could answer something like "Who was the captain of Serenity?" it'll do well with more common queries with easily accessible 3rd party services. 4) Yes, I do. Not the number of days between those dates but the number of dates between specific dates is a function I use. Normally through websites that calculate it for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why Google's separation between the different meanings of the word can be so helpful. Give it enough context to know the meaning that you are using and it will usually do a much better job of finding what you're looking for.
But I can't replicate it adding or removing words from a phrase as long as I put the phrase in quotes. It always seems to search for the exact phrase, though sometimes with punctuation in between.
Maybe I'm getting the short end of the stick in some A/B testing.
I've had searches where it does both adding words (fictional example: drops words becomes drops some words) and others where it excludes words (does the "missing: drops"). Usually it's on searches with words that have multiple meanings where the meaning I am searching for is the less common of them, stuff dealing with subject matter that is academic, etc.
Are you looking for an unlocked phone? Search for that instead. And yes, you're going to get carriers in most any search for purchasing cell phones because carriers sell a lot of cell phones.
That'd be somewhat understandable, except for the fact that only 2 of the 10 were in the right country.
AFAICT, they blithely ignore all the things that *used* to make it possible to actually give Google value - the Google-fu expressions, including most importantly +term and -term.
Umm, the + operator was deprecated in 2011. I don't exactly know what effect it has had since then. (It seems to do something, but it's highly unpredictable.)
Exactly the point, the "Google-fu" was the ability to use the operators (prior to being removed/depreciated) to get the results you needed. They're slowly stripping them out replacing them with guess work based on what is most likely wanted. The problem with "most likely" is that it must have some sort of popularity. The real hidden gems of the internet are simply lost and your ability to sift through the rest is compromised by what others have wanted.
FUCK IT! I'll do it live and test it in production!
I want my fucking comment link back. Share? Who wants to share Dice shill stories.
Submitted by Nerval's Lobster? Check
Shilling for Dice? Check
I love that everyone hates the cross-promotional crap they try to do.
I did a search the other day for LG G3 retailers... I tried dozens of variations, verbatim on, quotes, etc. I was given options in the US, UK, some Canadian cellphone carriers. In the end I had to go to Shopbot.ca to get Canadian companies selling the phone.
Use "Ask Jeeves" syntax: "where can i buy lg g3?" at google.
The first result came up as BestBuy. The second was an article literally entitled "Where can I buy LG's new superphone?" The third was a link to LG's website with a nice "Where to Buy" link.
I put in that exact search, which good god that's a lot to type, and the results I get are LG which lists where to buy from cell service providers (not retailers), BestBuy US, BestBuy Canada (closer) but again they are cell service sellers, Costco which is WirelessWave cell service sellers, an actual cell service provider, 5 reasons to buy via Forbes, CNET where to buy in America, the UK launch, Amazon.COM (not .ca which has it listed), and another article on why I should buy it.
Compare that to Shopbot where I type in "lg g3" and get what I wanted/searched for: Amazon.ca, DirectCanada, NCIX, Newegg.ca, etc. I also get multiple versions of the phone, pricing, and so on. Granted Shopbot is very specialized but until Google can interpret "where to buy" or that I am doing a shopping search vs a review search, etc then it needs to back off and let me tell it what to search for and stop guessing at it.
lol - it was out there, shopbot had indexed dozens of them. Google was doing exactly what you assumed, that I'd want to buy it from a cell service provider (retailers sell it for as little as $320 vs $699 for cell companies). As I stated, I tried dozens of searches not the phrase "lg g3 retailers". Google did find me the phone on amazon.com and amazon & ebay.co.uk but couldn't find it on amazon.ca despite knowing I'm Canadian. Shopbot, it was the first result because they didn't try to guess what I was looking for, they just searched what I put in.
+ was removed entirely and - is periodically ignored now.
See my post below about LG G3 retailers.
I did a search the other day for LG G3 retailers... I tried dozens of variations, verbatim on, quotes, etc. I was given options in the US, UK, some Canadian cellphone carriers. In the end I had to go to Shopbot.ca to get Canadian companies selling the phone.
When the results are displayed go to Search Tools and change All Results to Verbatim
Only works in a very limited fashion and is incredibly annoying to have to search then click a few times to get it to search what I asked for in the first place. It also only works in certain types of searches, others don't have the verbatim option or you can only select one type of search tool at a time.
Tried them all. Bing does the exact same bullshit that Google does. duckduckgo's results are so similar and extremely limited that it's not really viable for anything but common searches. Dogpile is a pile, even for common searches.
Try enclosing your error output in quotation marks. That tells Google that you're looking for that phrase, not just that combination of words.
HAHAHAHA
Google regularly ignores the quotation marks, drops words inside them, fails to include them together... they've even started ignoring the - when you want to exclude something... I'll do something like -shop and it'll bring up domains with shop in it, in the title, and in the description
I have the same problem too... I hate the new search methodology. I liked some of the unobtrusive suggestions like "did you mean" but now days I have to fight with search get it to do my actual search and not some shorted/twisted guess of what most people want to find. Verbatim helps, a little, but the lack of +, the ignoring of - and " " along with the guess work is bordering on useless. I've tried a half dozen alternatives but they seem to have extremely limited indexes and the results are largely the same.
Location searching is another major problem... my ISP is Toronto based and I don't share location information. When this situation happens Google takes a guess based on the IP and will sometimes give Toronto results other times Montreal which means French. Other times it'll decide the street in Canada I want is actually in Asia or Europe and I just have to facepalm it.
There were important differences, however, rather than hash that out I'll just give you the latest:
http://www.trueachievements.co...
It also includes the link to an official PDF.
Not exactly 'definitive' but a source: http://www.trueachievements.co...
These newfangled games are lame. I tried ET once, never again.
It's probably a good thing because the article is misinformed. It's not ALL titles and you don't play the disc. You put the disc in and will be given a version you can download for free (presumably recompiled for x86). The only problem is the initial compatibility list is very sparse at ~100 titles with "more being added" which could mean another handful or hundreds but doubtful that you'll get all you games - especially those they think they can re-monetize.
Yup. The effing bing bar is something I delete on a weekly basis from several machines. Granted it's also stupid user syndrome.
I don't trust Mozilla for a second but Chrome's idea of privacy is to pretend it doesn't exist... even if you block everything you can Chrome still has the ability to send data back as part of its core functionality. To my knowledge they haven't exploited this yet but it's only a matter of time.
Yeah, no kidding. [snip] This sounds like a feature nobody actually gives a damn about.
Mozilla, what happened to a lean, standards compliant, privacy focused browser?
A million times this. I really want to give up on Mozilla. They've lost their way and the designers rule the roost. I just don't have any better options. I'm never going closed source again and I'm not a fan of Chrome or Google's concept of privacy.
Tape is even less expensive, yet the mainstream moved away from it. A disk is just tape that's been wound up into a smaller space.
Tape is great for archival purposes where you're dumping/retrieving streams of data that can be stored sequentially. That's not exactly useful for the needs of an active HDD.
Spoiled brat. I remember buying RAM at $30 per meg. Before that the metric was pretty meaningless as we were happy with just a few kilobytes. $100 per TB for flash memory would have been a nerd's wet dream back then.
I remember those days too. The reality is though at this very moment I can get a platter drives at $0.03/GB so $0.70/GB does not seem attractive in the least. There are performance considerations and platter drives have fewer uses which is why I think a reasonable price should be $0.04-0.05/GB for NAND.
Call me when prices reach $90 for 2TB+
1) Not likely, the video is on SoundHound's YouTube channel - they're not hiding anything
2) I honestly don't know how they're processing it that fast... it likely isn't cloud based otherwise there would be a delay between upload/process/download... this seems nearly instant which means they either have an insane compression algorithm, a special microphone setup, or are running a local setup that improves speed beyond real world (ie: wifi with the server right next to them)
3) Yes, they repeat some of those phrases in their advertisement... while I'm sure they have some natural language logic, it's likely they're using common questions/web queries to optimize those answers... so while I doubt it could answer something like "Who was the captain of Serenity?" it'll do well with more common queries with easily accessible 3rd party services.
4) Yes, I do. Not the number of days between those dates but the number of dates between specific dates is a function I use. Normally through websites that calculate it for me.