From: "Sam Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm not clear about how Freegle works out which keywords to associate > with the keys (looked in the FAQ and about Freegle, but no joy), but the > scheme I describe above is implemented in aggregate by DirectHit.com and > in a personalized manner by NeuroGrid.com (my own offering). The > NeuroGrid keyword-file association tracking mechanism is already being > implemented in a couple of other P2P systems. Currently Freegle matches search keywords with the key itself. In case of HTML pages, the title is also stored and displayed. Making it searchable too is not very difficult. The same can (and will) be done for meta keywords/description and even the content of the page itself. Of course, this doesn't prevent malicious publishers from using inappropriate keywords - as it happens on the WWW all the time. Using feedback for rating is close to impossible with a Freenet search engine the way it is currently organized. The web variant could track clicks on search results via a simple redirect script. But the in-Freenet variant can't track anything. Also, in the case of deliberately misleading pages, users don't know they've been fooled before they actually load the page (and then it's too late for the search engine to notice). Your NeuroGrid concept looks really elaborate BTW... I will check it out in detail when I have some more time. A search engine concept that _can_ be transferred to Freegle is "rating by links." Google does it this way IFRC. The more links lead to a page, the "better" it is. The text of the links can also be used as keywords. Of course, there are plenty possibilities to fool this system too... will require some thought to implement it properly. > On another note, if you want to have a porn filter, who decides what is > porn and what is not? That's a good question... -Stefan _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to