You must log in or register to comment.
Fact: 90% of science is made with quartz
… accurate
My favourite mineral - potato.
Russian in origin, if I’m not mistaken
The only way crystals can heal you is if that crystal is salt and your illness is a salt deficiency.
Presenting to the emergency room with hyponatremia, from hypo meaning low, natron meaning sodium, and hemia meaning presence in blood. Low sodium presence in blood !
What if I’m bleeding out from a gunshot wound and I have a crystal that is sufficient diameter to plug said gunshot wound?
Helps not die. Not so much heal.
Not dying helps heal.
I remain skeptical. But you do you.
To be fair; pretty common.
You could probably use crystals of other elements to treat other deficiencies too, such as iron? But it’s probably easier to just take an iron tablet or eat some food containing iron 😂
scholar.google.com is where you want to go.
Also, in my Google-fu experience technical terms work well for finding better scholarly results.
Same experience I have had. Swapping to scholar gets me relevant results that aren’t filled with ai gibberish and backwater Hokum. Still have to be careful about study sizes and sigma values and applicability, but miles ahead for at least getting to that being my issue.
Your scholarly ways are not safe from AI gibberish.
Yes this is absurd, but it’s a (serious) scientific community issue, not a search engine issue.
Putting scientific in the search criteria should redirect there then.
At the very least, it might be nice if they ask you if you want to go there instead.
On the other hand, I’m just happy that Google Scholar hasn’t gotten completely destroyed by SEO yet.
Bro, the works cited is the SEO.
What’s the scientific term for rocks?
In fairness, I was thinking specifically of plants. I expect better results when looking up “S. lycopersicum” than “tomato”.
An example off the top of my head is saying pyrite instead of fool’s gold.
I still remember trying to find the space group for Copper Telluride. No amount of technical terms could help me there.
P6/mmm?
Iirc, yed
I don’t even get “did you mean” anymore. Just, we found more examples of this, so this must be what you meant.
Even DuckDuckGo straight-up tells you “we didn’t find many results containing [blank].” Yeah. That’s why I wrote [blank.]
“There are a lot of results that aren’t what you’re looking for.”
Okay, great?
Right? Literally didn’t ask.
So that “here’s irrelevant results” tactic must keep people engaged more than “tough luck, found nothing”. My takeaway based on that assumption is that people must suck at using search, unless we think we don’t want those irrelevant results but really they jog our memories or something 51% of the time…
Hadn’t considered that search engines would ruin themselves to feed Engagemagog, but in hindsight it’s hardly surprising.
That’d also explain when you show up on a front page or focus on a search bar, evanescent outline of a thought trying to take form through your fingertips, and the stupid goddamn website goes Football scores?! Celebrity babies?! Dearborn Michigan?! Large Hadron Collider?! Houseboats?!?!
Hey, eerbody else is searching The Kardashians* today so maybe you should too!
*to be replaced with non-aged cultural reference
Those last three were real examples when I checked Google just now. They’re not relevant to anything or anywhere in my life. I don’t even get it. I can’t imagine how they’re some hot new thing, today specifically. If they were just trying to shotgun people’s hyperfixations, there’d be more about transportation infrastructure and gacha games.
Interesting, the first two of the final three terms are in the news right now:
Houseboat is somewhat surprising. They have made some San Francisco Bay news in the past week:
For those looking for some Google alternatives:
- Qwant has a custom indexing strategy and is okay
- Brave Search ~uses Google and Bing~ EDIT: they use a custom index too
- Startpage uses Google and Bing and it’s prettier than Brave IMO
- SearX is ugly but has a lot of sources
- Perplexity AI tracks the shit out of you but it’s decent
- Kagi is customizable but it costs you
Feel free to add on any I missed or opinions on these; I haven’t used any extensively
EDIT: Ecosia for trees and DDG for Bing without ads
Brave uses its own index. It used to be supplemented with results from other engines but I believe they have now phased that out.
Brave is the best of the free options in my experience, and it supports “bangs” which let’s you send your querry to a different engine (typing “how far is it to the sun !g” will pass the search to google. Duckduckgo also supports bangs), this is especially helpful for image searches (!gi for google images) since braves image search sucks dogshit 😅
Quant seemed like the second best free option in my experience. Some people don’t like brave as a company for various reasons, so quant may be a good option for those folks. Its my understanding that Mozilla has worked with quant in some way, which is kinda neat.
Both have their own index making them a sustainable/viable option going forward, where meta search engines that use other engine’s results are at the whim of those they fetch the results from (but may provide better results by piggybacking off a larger successful engine)
Thank you for the corrections! I’ve updated the post. I agree that Brave search had the best results/UX. As you mentioned, I have my own moral qualms with brave as a company.
You’re very welcome, thanks for your initial post laying out a bunch of the options for folks to think about ☺️
Hope you have a good one!
Ecosia uses the money they generate with ads to plant trees 🌿 (I think it’s bing on the backend)
Added! I love the mission
Brave Search does not use Google and Bing. And why did you skip over DDG?
I’ve updated the post to say that in Brave uses a custom index. I skipped DuckDuckGo because it only uses Bing :(
Qwant was good until they georestricted it for no reason
Kagi user here.
Bought a month to test it and then went for a year immediately afrer. I really like it!
I’ve had similar sentiment from other users! I’m inclined to give it a shot
MetaGer is a metasearch engine focused on protecting users’ privacy. Based in Germany, and hosted as a cooperation between the German NGO ‘SUMA-EV - Association for Free Access to Knowledge’ and the University of Hannover, the system is built on 24 small-scale web crawlers under MetaGer’s own control. In September 2013, MetaGer launched MetaGer.net, an English-language version of their search engine.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetaGer
It currently supports the following languages/regions:
Dansk (Danmark)
Deutsch (Österreich/Schweiz/Deutschland)
English (Great Britain/Ireland/Malaysia/USA)
Español (España/México)
Suomalainen (Suomi)
Français (Canada/France)
Italiano (Italia)
Nederlands (Nederland)
Polski (Polska)
Svenska (Sverige)
Source: https://metager.org/lang
There is a TOR-hidden service too:
It is open source:
https://gitlab.metager.de/open-source/MetaGer
And has other useful features, for example:
[…] you can hide yourself behind our proxyserver just by opening the result anonymously? Use “OPEN ANONYMOUSLY”; this also affects the following links.
Source: https://metager.org/tips
Alternatively I use some SearxNG-instances, preferably hosted in the EU:
Don’t forget DuckDuckGo.
Added!
Try Andisearch, it was the first AI search ever and apart is one of the most private search engine which even actively protect your ID, no ads, no tracking, no logs, anonymous.
Adding as search engine in your browser
https://andisearch.com/?query=%sPerplexity, well, is still one of the more private AI, but best to use the extension which works well and anonymous (logs only tech data), Chromium only. In Firefox you can use perplexity only as search engine from the website itself.
Ever died from smallpox while holding a healing crystal?
Didn’t fucking think so 😎
Why not just use Google scholar?
I’m not sure what exactly you’re typing into the search field, but I don’t anything like this. The top 3 sites I get for a search of “minerals” are wikipedia, australian museum, and britannica. Typing in “crystals” gets me a healthline article debunking crystal healing, but the following results are some woman’s personal store and amazon. Lastly, being direct about wanting scientific articles gets me said articles…
Side note: Why are there so many people pushing for kagi in this thread and skipping over the fact that duckduckgo exists? It’s kinda bizarre to see.
Hell, typing in “scientific data about minerals” gets me a bunch of university geology department websites.
I’ve commented about potential Kagi astroturfing here before.
Seems likely to me.
Their trial - too short for me - felt like a private Google w/improvements.
Now, as a filthy freeloader, my default is DuckDuckGo. I am dissatisfied with the results and !bang out to Google (!g) about half the time. I pray DDG makes use of this data to improve their engine.
tl;dr astroturfing vs. bad results vs. enabling the king of adware
Gosh I need to set up SearXNG! Also “private Google” vibes. Instances here
Half the time?
I switch to another search engine about 1 in 100
Why are there so many people pushing for kagi in this thread and skipping over the fact that duckduckgo exists?
It’s a tide ad
Google results are different for everyone by design. Results vary per person because of assumptions made about what you’d like to see. I believe the term is filter bubbles.
Idk if anything has changed since but a high school teacher showed us this in a computer lab. She gave us an exact phrase to type in and we all compared search results. They were similar enough to be useful but had significant differences in what the first page showed. And we weren’t even signed in to our school accounts, when we did it was even worse.
This scene live rent free in my head. Also fuckin Crystal Healing types make me look bad when I just think pretty rocks look nice
I know right? Completely ruin geology.
Aaaaannd this is why I use Kagi. The site ranking feature let’s me block or down rank sketchy sites. (And lets you boost credible sites.)
As a gem and mineral collecting hobbyist I feel this pain so, so much.
God I had this issue looking for used wheels for my car. Like, actual wheels to use for a track day, but results showed nothing but simracing threads for used STEERING wheels.
Like multivitamins? (Also contains minerals!)
Google decides what you want to see and what you want to see is right wing garbage.
“scientific data about minerals -crystal -healing” should do it
Excluding crystal from a search about minerals may eliminate more than you want.
true, that was my first idea, it needs some workshopping
I’ve tried the exclusion Boolean term with Google before, and it really didn’t work :(
maybe try -“thing”?
