[breathen]

I personally use Kagi, but "google" is really just short-hand for searching a specific resource (like, say, docs.python.org).

I suppose if you're googling an open-ended error with little context it's probably rougher now, but I don't see how you could possibly prepare for answering questions about arbitrary errors with no context via flashcards.

[BeetleB]

Who said anything about errors? I was referring to APIs. Often, I'll enter a Python standard library function as a Google search hoping to get to the Python docs so I can see the proper documentation for that function. It's quite often that the link to the Python docs is not in the first "screen" of results. Instead I get 3rd party sites that explain how to use that API.

For some APIs, it definitely saves more time putting it into the flashcard. The overall time it takes to type it, and then review it over the next so many years, can be less than it takes to search it, click, and then read the Python docs over and over.

As Michael Nielsen pointed out:

> In an appendix below I estimate that for an average card, I'll only need 4 to 7 minutes of total review time over the entire 20 years. Those estimates allow for occasional failed reviews, resetting the time interval.

(He's excluding the time to type, which could be another minute or so). So anything that takes, say, 10 minutes to repeatedly look up and read over your life is better suited to be in your flashcards. If you don't think you'll need to look it up often enough, leave it out.