Google: Compromised or Corpratized?

Since going public, has anyone else noticed how pitiful that search engine has become?

I agree with you. It's giving me crap for my science fair project topic. Maybe a switch to Dogpile is in order?

>Azi

azi, that pic of Paul Bearer made me crap myself with delight. OHHH YESSSS YESSSS THE UNDERTAKER OH YESSSSSS

Still far better than Yahoo or any other type search engine available, Bout Time.




seekerof

Im surprised someone actually knows who that is! I just got bored one day and typed in "paul bearer" at that one crappy search engine we've been talking about, and bam! funniest pic ever. I had no clue who or what paul bearer even was, and i really had no business searching for him. Best search of my life though...

>Azi

"New Orleans"&"death toll"

&

"New Orleans"&"death count"


That should come up in Google, no SeeK? Especially since all others kick back, at a minimum, 75 entries?

I've always used Google as my primary search engine. I haven't noticed any difference at all. I like the Google Image Search too.

Since going public, I've noticed...

- Full searching
- An upgrading of current features (read: gmail)
- A full rollout of a slieu of amazing features
- A slate of amazing new features rumored to be in the works (What do you think they're buying all that dark fibre for?)

I missed the part where they had a drop in performance???

I'll spell it out: Public media entites have enforced such a stringent self policing policy as to amount to state run censorship. Google can now be counted among them.
Run phrases, as if you were looking for damning topic categories on the current situations/administration.

Here's a start, as referenced above:

Your search - "New Orleans"&"death toll" - did not match any documents.

A bit canary in the coal mine? Maybe. But run it on other engines, or some other such string.
It can run features out the a double s, but content, in this case, INFORMATION, rules the day, no?

The reason that Google gives no return on "New Orleans"&"death toll"
is that "&" seems to be not be found, not "New Orleans" or "death toll".

By typing in "New Orleans"&"death toll", it searches for "New Orleans", &, "death toll".

But if you type in "New Orleans" "death toll", you're only searching for two items, not three, and you get plenty of results.

AND isn't necessary with Google search, and & doesn't seem to be computed as an AND function. A list is by default assumed to be looking for all items.

Theres a whole bunch of threads on this now. Google is definately censored and up to some dodgy things.

Take a look at this thread and try the 'Gharib' test.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

I've been using Yahoo and it seems to be ALOT better than Google these days. I used to be a Google fanatic, but it has certainly went downhill as of late.