Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

It's not, it's the same, they haven't removed what they have already indexed

But if you want to loose credibility yet again and loose your investor money on a new search, go ahead, you do you



sort by: page size:

That's not really relevant - the article says that by no means are search results identical for every search.

Yeah, I just tried a sample search and it returned mostly the same results, no matter how many sites I removed. They were just in a different order.

That is a whole other story than removing search results.

Hopefully that "results you removed" is not permanent, although from the looks of it, it is. Sometimes you use the same keyword, when searching for 2 different things.

Those are two separate issues. Altavista's index certainly got updated over time, so changes in the search results aren't that surprising.

I believe the issue OP is addressing is that even given an identical index, two different users might see to entirely different search results, as their individual search history is factored into the query.


You assume you're back at the search results. As OP proved that's not necessarily the case.

I'd be especially interested in not seeing the same search result twice.

You're right, the searching code should be updated to hide deleted results.

Don't expect companies to really delete anything- they have little incentive to do so.


You can't hoard search results since they change. The same search in March may be different in April.

I kind of don't care about correctness. Just hide results that seem to be duplicate.

No, they remove search results as well. See chillingeffects.org.

Do the search again. We have two indexes, a shallow one for things we have never seen and a deep one for things people have searched for. The results have changed likely since your first search. This would not be an issue if we had only 15% new searches.

They kinda do, at least in the sense that they no longer appear to index the entire web, instead cutting off the long tail for just the things they'll actually return results for.

Absolutely. It will either ignore the terms, or claim that no results are found.

Perhaps it no longer indexes as much as it used to, at least for noncommercial content.


Doubt it, it's more likely that they want to maintain full control over results. They likely have certain results they don't want you to filter. Also, relevance can change over time. You might filter out something now that made sense to filter out now but not in the future after the site changed and got reindexed.

I believe they are doing some search aggregation from multiple sources and from what they say they do not seem to be caching results much.

The dumb thing is that you can get the original search, but it’s buried in the advanced search as “verbatim” results.

Why would I not want verbatim results?


There won't have been any major change in the past few months that would have negatively impacted your search results.

If you have any specific examples you can always reach out via the feedback box or to staff directly :)


If you read the page I linked to, it instructs you to search to try it out for yourself to see that search results are not stripped from the referrer.
next

Legal | privacy