[Search-l] vision

[Fred Bauder]

Yes, rather like choosing music at Pandora.com, one could chose the
weighting factors to be used in your search. That assumes that generic
weighting factors have not already winnowed the results. So one could
chose advertising if you're shopping, and journal articles if you're
researching.

Fred Bauder


> Hello, I am notoriously bad at lurking, these days. So I apologise if I
> am repeating something old, or speaking at odds with the general
> direction.
>
>
>
> I am speaking as a 'search' visionary, not a computer expert. I see
> 'search' as being more powerful than the old concept of 'library'. I
> have hopes for what will someday be available, and that is why I tried
> to make contact as soon as I heard of Wiki Search.
>
>
>
> Two or three major points, which I hope intersect with this venture in
> some way:
>
>
>
> Configurable ranking algorithms. I imagine that there must be more or
> less complicated ranking algorithms that 'weight' various factors such
> as 'type A spam', 'type B spam', 'authoritativeness among other non-spam
> pages', 'commercial content', 'specificity', etc. etc.      I would like
> to see some user choice in making those weightings. In other words, if a
> ranking could be simplified as 100 weighting factors, let a user fiddle
> with those factors. Several 'standard' weighting assignments would
> always be available, but the user would have the opportunity to
> 'interpolate between weighting vectors' or even 'create a weighting
> vector from scratch'. Weighting vectors could be widely shared. Probably
> some committed souls would do their best to create a 'weighting vector
> closely matching google performance'. This kind of 'open weighting
> source' freedom would eliminate the current one-weighting tyranny of
> google and others.
>
>
>
>
>
> Commercial taint: On one hand, commerce is immensely powerful, and can
> fund useful things. On the other hand, it can diminish free and fair
> access. Even though I have always heard that Google does not accept pay
> for rank, my sense is that somehow, a large commercial venture can
> achieve high rank SOMEHOW. (By linking to its own websites, by continual
> SEO.) Isn't it true that Google has the possibility of political
> influence, for example simply not ranking a large category of pages if
> they don't match the prevailing trends?
>
>
>
> I have two thoughts:
>
>
>
> 1. The first is that with an 'open source weighting system', any company
> (Ford?) or consortium (Better Business Bureau) can provide a search
> gateway with their own weighting system. If they have a way of providing
> extra value while pushing their own members, such an initiative can
> freely try to attract users.
>
>
>
> 2. The second is a 'government responsibility' idea that may not go down
> well with all. Just as the Library of Congress evolved into a nationally
> supported gateway to information, I have this feeling that LC should
> also be supporting and promoting a NEUTRAL CONFIGURABLE search engine
> such as Wiki Search. Of course this could only work if it is not run by
> ideologues. Maybe it should be an international effort? I think open
> access to information via search is the library of tomorrow. We don't
> want a Coca Cola TM library, in many cases we want a Community Library.
>
>
>
> Talk first, think later. Now I will take a look at the alpha site.
> Thanks for your patience.
>
>
>
> Jim Papadopoulos
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>