|
|
|
|
|
|
by jleyank
1516 days ago
|
|
|
The firehose aspect of Google makes it hard for me to separate the wheat from the chaff for any "popular" topic. Ad's, trolls, ... They're ordered by the magic, not by the correctness or usefulness. When I went into the bookstore looking for an Algorithm book, I went to the computer section. I didn't start at the first rack of books and scan until I found what I wanted. Nor did I look at the best-seller list. |
|
|
I agree 100% on this: a well-curated set of search engine results or directories (like how Yahoo! started back in the day) would be immensely useful today
Getting to the well-curated list, though, does bring its own Catch-22: who determines what's "good" initially? How do you collect enough "qualified" editors/submitters to get it rolling? How do you keep from falling into the broken world of social voting[0]?
------------
[0] https://antipaucity.com/2015/09/16/like-problems-social-voti...