On 9/14/07, Wade Curry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bob La Quey, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:16:58PM -0700, wrote::
> > On 9/14/07, Wade Curry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Andrew Lentvorski([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at
> > > 01:05:27AM -0700:
> >
> > >
> > > > What I really want from a search engine is the "Junk" button
> > > > from Thunderbird which is used to help train your spam
> > > > filter.  When I run a search, I want to be able to classify
> > > > sites as "Junk" so that they start dropping in Googlerank for
> > > > me.
> > >
> > > Bayesian filtering of search results -- now this idea sounds
> > > useful.  It puts power in the users' hands, and would make it
> > > /much/ more difficult for any content provider to even /guess/
> > > how search results are ranked for any given user, regardless of
> > > the choice of search engine.
> > >
> > Yes. I agree with this. It could also be done on the server side
> > ... they after all have your input.
>
> I like the idea of having a server do this, but I'm thinking more
> along the lines of a local service for a LAN.  If search results
> will be aggregated from several sources, I'd rather not have that
> be controlled by the search providers.  A sort of search proxy that
> runs on my LAN appeals to me because I'd have more control over
> what gets thrown in the faces of my kids.

Well it does raise an intriquing question. Where do you
distribute search? I see no reason for search to be centralized.
The net was originally intended to be peer to peer. I see no
real reason that it is not improved by returning to those
roots.

Here is a pretty long list of distributed search engines,
a few of which I recognize, most of which I do not. Obviously
there ismore than one way to do it.

> > In fact I have had this very idea under active discussion for
> > several months now with my Buddy Brad Collins who is deeply into
> > this and the more general problem of metadata for the web and
> > beyond.
> >
> > Note that to some extent the social bookmarking sites like
> > del.icio.us are starting to provide a mechanism for alternative
> > ratings of sites. This data could easily be gathered by search
> > engines and used as yet another ranking mechanism.
>
> I've heard del.icio.us mentioned numerous times, but have never
> tried it.  Seems that if you aggregate results, the rankings of
> *any* of the contributing engines could be used that way,
> especially if a proxy did that work.

I use it for all of my bookmarking now. Less for the social
aspects than for the convenience with which I can tag and
search my bookmarks. From my point of view the fact that
can access it with a standard browser from almost anywhere
is just a plus as well.

BobLQ


-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to