On May 8, 4:38*pm, yf...@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca (Malcolm Dew-Jones)
wrote:
> joel garry (joel-ga...@home.com) wrote:
>
> : I think google (...snip...)
> : ... And two identical searches _still_ may not give consistent
> : results.
>
> Since when is google supposed to give consistent results?
>
> That would be a _bad_ thing.
>
> Any algorithm that can tries to reduce terabytes of data into one useful
> page of information must be making a lot of assumptions. *If a result page
> doesn't change pretty frequently then that would be the sign of a terrible
> algorithm.

Well, I'm a db geek, and for me an algorithm that doesn't reduce to
correct results when given enough specificity is a bad, bad algorithm.

But even worse is an actual commercial transaction that doesn't follow
the basic rules of transactions. Been there, done that, got the
credit card bill, got the fraud investigation going.

Face it, google's entire business model is based on advertising. They
have no accountability at all for it. Great for them, evil
incarnate. And it does crack me up when they serve me up Arabic or
Chinese ads, I have no idea why they think I can read either.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
Golden Shield Project: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200803/chinese-firewall