Google scheint ein Suchproblem zu haben

Googles Suchergebnisse scheinen unter minderer Qualität zu leiden.

Google’s results might be as good as ever. They might even be better than ever. But if the public perception is that Google has a search quality problem, that wins, because we don’t have any hard figures about relevancy.

Danny Sullivan listet in einem ausführlichen Artikel auf Searchengine Land die vielen Probleme, mit denen Google zu kämpfen hat, auf, und ruft in seiner Conclusio zu kritischem Denken auf.

We should continue to hold Google and search engines to a high standard and highlight where things clearly go wrong. But we should also understand that perfection isn’t going to be possible. That with imperfect search engines, we need to employ more human critical thinking skills alongside the searches we do — and that we teach those to generations to come.

Life itself rarely has “one true answer” to anything. Expecting Google or any search engine to give them is a mistake.

Es scheint also doch noch ein wenig Hoffnung in den menschlichen Intellekt gelegt zu werden.

Das „don’t be evil“-Bookmarklet

Ein Bookmarklet, das Google-Suchergebnisse mit Googles eigenem Algorithmus verbessert.

When you search for „cooking“ today, Google decides that renowned chef Jamie Oliver is a relevant social result. That makes sense. But rather than linking to Jamie’s Twitter profile, which is updated daily, Google links to his Google+ profile, which was last updated nearly two months ago. Is Google’s relevance algorithm simply misguided?

No. If you search Google for Jamie Oliver directly, his Twitter profile is the first social result that appears. His abandoned Google+ profile doesn’t even appear on the first page of results. When Google’s engineers are allowed to focus purely on relevancy, they get it right.

Das Bookmarklet wurde von Programmierern der Netzwerke Facebook, Twitter und MySpace erstellt.

Update 25. Jänner 2012

Mittlerweile gibt es auch eine Safari-Extension.

Vorteile errechneter Suchergebnisse

In einem Artikel, der zu den Vorwürfen der Manipulation von Suchergebnissen bei Google Stellung nimmt, erklärt Amit Singhal, warum man bei Google auf durch Algorithmen errechnete Suchergebnisse setzt und nicht, wie zB Facebook das plant, auf durch User ausgewählte.

The web is built by people. You are the ones creating pages and linking to pages. We are utilizing all this human contribution through our algorithms to order and rank our results. We think that’s a much better solution than a hand-arranged one. Other search engines approach this differently – selecting some results one at a time, manually curating what you see on the page. We believe that approach which relies heavily on an individual’s tastes and preferences just doesn’t produce the quality and relevant ranking that our algorithms do. And given the hundreds of millions of queries we have to handle every day, it wouldn’t be feasible to handle each by hand anyway.