Skip to main content

Using Scour - Comparing Results

While many sites have compared the search results between Google, MSN and Yahoo, noting that generally they are all the same. I started using Scour recently which puts search results for all three into a single item (yes, it's a Point-based search which is interesting in and of itself but reminds me of most "point-based" systems - you'll never get enough points to make it of use without trying to game it). (you do get to "rate" each search response which may / may not have its own benefits - it's too early to tell).

Yes - the results of all three are generally the same BUT the relevance is interesting. Here's a sample (inspired from a tweet by Marina Martin):

The Pragmatic Programmer - Scour Search

Here are the results:


Notice anything?

1. While Amazon shows as the number one, MSN placed it as the number 1 result while Google/Yahoo placed it as number two. Just because I'm searching for a phrase that matches a book doesn't mean I want the book - it's great that it's there - but if I wanted to BUY the book, wouldn't I likely just go to Amazon or my favorite online bookstore?

2. Both Google and Yahoo link to essentially the same site but with a different URL (Google points to this one  (http://www.Pragprog.com) while Yahoo points to this one (http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com). But the content itself is IDENTICAL.

3. Google's second result takes you to the main site whereas Yahoo's (doesn't show in the image) takes you to an articles page. which arguably has more details.

What all of this shows me is that the Search for all three companires is still reproducing the same site, trying to put a slightly different spin on essentially the same result. On the entire top 10 list, the same core site is listed 5 times, a book store is listed once (but at the top), Wikipedia is listed twice,  an interview with the authors is listed once , and the book distributor (OReilly) is listed once as well.

Is there really more valuable content on each of the 5 different links from the same site or would a person be more likely to "click" around the site? If that's the case, is it any wonder that people get frustrated by search?
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

When A Machine Starts To Care

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke (1962)  I first used that quote when I was starting out in the tech industry. Back then, it was a way to illustrate just how fast and powerful computers had become. Querying large datasets in seconds felt magical—at least to those who didn’t build them.  Today, we’re facing something even more extraordinary. Large Language Models (LLMs) can now carry on conversations that approach human-level fluency. Clarke’s quote applies again. And just as importantly, many researchers argue that LLMs meet—or at least brush up against—the criteria of the Turing Test.  We tend to criticize LLMs for their “hallucinations,” their sometimes-confident inaccuracies. But let’s be honest: we also complain when our friends misremember facts or recount things inaccurately. This doesn’t excuse LLMs—it simply highlights that the behavior isn’t entirely alien. In some ways, it mirrors our own cognitive limits....
Post a Comment
Read more