Pseudo-monopolies are great at extinguishing imagination like that, and tbh Google search (as I understand its basic setup) was only as good as it was thanks to timing and few really good competitors.

  • Elle@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sort of, I don’t know enough (or think I know enough) to speak to the specifics of the PageRank system stuff, which is why I glossed over it. From personal experience with however it works, earlier or now, I’ve not really felt like it suited the way I wanted to search for things, nor allowed for it.

    On a really basic level I gather it was (and may still be) related to how often some sites were linked to from other sites, with some extra background weighting this way or that to help surface presumably relevant results. To put it crudely, sort of a popularity contest, give or take the weighting details. That tends to suck though for new or less popular/obscure stuff, the latter of which I tend to prefer (unintentionally, but somewhat intentionally).

      • Elle@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You absolutely can. I did, and plenty of other people do all the time about a variety of systems, search engines included. That’s not to say they’ll be good critiques, but that’s irrelevant to whether or not they can.

        And in that vein, I’m not suggesting mine is a good critique. However it is reflective of my opinions from my experience with their system and my admittedly rough knowledge of it at the time of writing. Instead of adding to dismissive replies, how about we all get together and read the PageRank wikipedia page and learn together.

        • Arrakis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Usually people educate themselves on a topic before trying to talk about it as if they have a clue.

          “But this is just, like, my opinion bro”

          • Elle@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            We’re not in /c/technology nor a tech themed instance, it’s a showerthought post (so the vibe should be casual), maybe learn to read a room?

            Edit:
            Also, it’s not as if I was speaking authoritatively, I was speaking to my experiences and I was upfront about the limits of my knowledge. Instead of bothering to constructively correct me, you flatly went, “Yeah, no.” and your entire entry into the convo was pretty condescending for no apparent reason.

            • Arrakis@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Instead of bothering to constructively correct me

              To quote a certain highly educated someone, we’re not in /c/technology nor a tech themed instance, it’s a showerthought post (so the vibe should be casual), so why would we go into technical details? maybe learn to read a room?

              your entire entry into the convo was pretty condescending for no apparent reason

              Except the stated one…

              Usually people educate themselves on a topic before trying to talk about it as if they have a clue.

              People are not gonna bother educating someone who won’t educate themselves, especially when what is said is so completely incorrect they have no idea where to even begin.