Wednesday, February 22, 2023

Getting rid of "search". How 'bout internet standardized directories?

Looking to eliminate search algorithms. "How ever am I supposed to find what I am looking for?"

One answer is to reject the idea of internet platforms picking winners and losers that do not show you what you want anyway. So how about standardized subject directories, where a content creator decides how to list links to their content. The trick would be to assign a "1" to each source of content, and divide that weight up - however the creator wishes - across the directories. You could put all weight into one sub-directory, or divide it up a bit here and a bit there. People trying to be listed everywhere would get less weight. The weights would determine list order within the sub-directory.

People who should know better did not notice how exact string matches stopped working in Google and the other search engines circa. 2014. That is when search started to suck. Now it it effectively a catalog designed to optimize shopping - with search weight determined by a platform pretending it is not a publisher or editor [hey Supreme Court: they obviously are, because they edit the 'table of contents'].

Today's search AI is garbage. Here is how I know: I am looking for fruit sock - bags to protect fruit, ripening on the tree. All I can find on Google is links to regular socks with pictures of fruit. Same when I try to find mathematics about language. All Google will show me is content about how mathematics is a language. I want an internet that understands prepositions! Too bad search engines cannot tell fruit pictures on socks, versus sock for fruit. But let's not ask for too much. 

Anyway, if a content creator decides to classify their content - then that sounds like a better system. Save the AI garbage for finding people whose content does not belong in that category - a policing activity that should be public, transparent, and using open source algorithms. In case of ambiguity, go with the opinion of the content creator. 

Would that work?

No comments:

Post a Comment