[–] NeoGoat 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 


I found search engines were more useful for me decades ago, with just keywords, before all the AI. AI is useful for a wider audience who are not familiar with concepts like keywords. It also works much of the time, but when it ignores my keywords, Likewise, web pages were more useful in the past, when they had less annoying adds and were written for people who had the intelligence to be computer-literate, when computer literacy was more correlated to intelligence. The paucity of information on many subjects outside of videos is also disappointing. For many people, especially the well-educated, reading is a faster way to learn for many things. Case in point: I was trying to confirm the spelling of "visik" to mean the opposite of audiile for my prior sentence. (Being an audile is associated with education level.) The only google definition for visik was a gay-sex robot. I tried "antonym of audlle" and the 5th offering is an antonum of "audible". DuckDuckGo says "Showing for 'antonymos of audible'" and gives me the option to "Search only for 'antonyms of audile'" which displays a page with only one entry for the word "audile". The net is getting dumber and dumber. When every person in the world has a computer, it will be even dumber.

searx.me actaully returned results with "visik" when given only "visik". It was still horrid about honoring exact spelling when given 2 words. Granted, google would do this if the word is quoted and prefixed with a plus. Google used to have an expert mode where you could do precise searching. @albatrosv15

[–] acheron2012 [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I think we would be best friends! I always do keyword searches. The above was just an overly graphic example since that is all people seem to understand nowadays. We also agree about the dumbing down of technology in general and the Internet in particular. I have read that Gen Y are actually Less computer literate than baby boomers now: managing your friends list on facebook is not "programming".

I eschew video answers! They are an absolute LAST Resort. When I want an answer I want to read a sentence, or even a page; NOT have some moron babble on in a 7 minute youtube video that may or more likely won't ever get to the promised point. Before minute 1 I am dragging around the clip hoping to stumble on something useful. And by minute 3 I don't even care any more, I'll just figure it out myself.

The entire domain is just immensely frustrating! I have never heard of searx.me. It looks promising. thanks.

[–] NeoGoat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I did PM you.

I can say 2 things in defense of videos. 1) There are certain things, like automotive repair, that are more difficult to convey in text. 2) There are certain areas, like automotive repair, where the experts are less likely to write descriptions than make videos. When I need to learn from videos, I just tend to grit my teeth and say, to myself, that I will need to just put the time in and be patient. I recall researching the net for automotive repair information around 2000 and being very disappointed and now finding many videos.

On the more general subject of idiocracy, there is a techonophillic dogma that everything is improving. Much is not. Apart from high-tech devices, there is a horrific race to the bottom with consumer goods,, hardware, & almost everything. Brand names rarely mean anything,; people buy the cheapest; quality continues to deteriorate. As late as the 1980s, there were reliable brands such as Maytag and Kenmore for washers & dryers. I've a Maytag washer from the 80s (or older) that is still going. Now, few brands are associated with quality. I understand, current machines often break down within the first year. 5 years ago, I put up lights using J hooks from a hardware store (OSH I think). A few weeks later, they had fallen because the metal quality was trash. Fortunately, there was little damage, but it could have been very expensive. Making reasonable steel is not rocket science.

Humanity mostly tunes rather than invents. For all of the improvements, I would argue a PC is not so different than it was 30 years ago. We have done almost nothing (except for GPUs) about the Von Neuman bottleneck. The whole machine should be highly parallel and orders of magnitude more powerful. (On the subject of computers, I'd say the mere existence of Microsoft is a good argument against there being intelligent life on earth.) Fission is another example. The uranium and plutonium technology was replicated, but only now is thorium being researched. In reference to your (@acheron2012) endorsement of fission iin another thread, my hesitancy is not due to technology, but to human psychology, as to whether man will be sufficiently careful. The on-site storage of waste poses extreme hazards, such as that at Indian River. It is not like NY is safe from radical acts.

There are also significant misunderstandings that underlie a great many statistics. Prolly much less than one percent of people who work in the area have a clue about this. Case in point, most all stock market technical analysis sheets mention beta for a given stock. Virtually nobody realizes this is a fucking meaningless number. I am writing this as someone who studied statistics as part of his dissertation research under a top professor, at a top 10 school.

[–] NassTee 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

You know, you don't have to marry them. You can search with one, and if you don't find what you're looking for, try another.

[–] albatrosv15 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

startpage.com uses google indexing.

Also experiment with searx.me