Jeanette need only read the last few lines. Balance optional:

I've noted that Google's search capabilities seem to be getting 
squishier over time. Results which do not contain all the search terms 
seem to be creeping towards the top of the heap (quite apart from 
obviously sponsored ones) and it seems harder to craft searches to 
eliminate the rubbish.

But, now it seems to be going blind.

I used "GBAK" as an acronym in a sign off string on (gasp) MSN

        88 TTFN CU GBAK ...

ignoring the merits of such a string, consider this.

Gargoyling

    gbak god bless and keep

Produced 20 hits, with this as #2

        ... used to use GBAK (more politically correct than God bless 
and keep ...

And this as number 3

        ... , GBAK, God bless and keep, my friend ...


BUT gadflying

    "God bless and keep" gbak

produced NO hits, and gagging

     "God bless and keep"

also produced no hits

ie Googlegagglegargoylegadflyga... is unable to find results which 
match a criterion, which a prior search could find.

NOW I understand that this MAY be able to be simply explained away by 
the original basis of G's operation which was to rate by links to 
pages with results which match the search criteria (or variants 
similar to that) BUT it seems truly pathetic that searches as above 
can fail for whatever reason on the flagship of the organisation that 
is trying to be the owner of all the world's data. If it succeeds, 
while still performing at anything like the above level, then our data 
is in real trouble.

Conclusion:

        Lock up your datas!

:-)
No. It wasn't all written just to make that terrible pun. It just 
occurred to me at the end. All the rest is bona fide.


            Russell

And, yes, I know.

    Datum, data
    Die, dice

    Rie, rice?
    Rum, ra?
    Plenum, plena (probably).
    Decorum, decora.
    ..
    :-)









-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist