Why might such a tool be useful? I suppose because you want to focus the search activities of users. Hence, I might want to offer a service allowing you to search this blog (and to do so in a more sophisticated way than would be allowed by the built-in search tool). Perhaps an educator might want to create a search tool focused on a specified body of content.
BTW – the Google ads on the search page do not generate revenue for the individual creating the customized search. I guess it is the charge for using the service. Fair enough.
I wrote about the return of expertise a couple of days ago and today I encounter a new search engine roughly based on “human” expertise. Topicle is a new search site that allows participants to create their own search engines. You can search using existing search topics or create your own. There was not topic on “education blogs“, so I created my own. I simply copied a few URLs from my bloglines account to get it started. I admit this was not very original, but it would seem a search tool should cover some of the basics before moving on to specialized topics.
Topicle is supposed to function as a social search service. Participants identify topics, add URLs, and rate existing URLs. We will have to see if my little seed grows.
Perhaps you have noticed the bid made by Microsoft to purchase Yahoo. It always bothers me when innovators (not certain I would categorize either company among the new innovators) gets gobbled up. This seems to happen everywhere I look – it has happened to the textbook market and it clearly happens to technology companies. Joe Nocera (NY Times) makes the observation that this is a move of an old company. Remember IBM? Microsoft has been so productive, but now seems destined to try to hold on by using its financial leverage rather than its innovation and creativity. Can’t keep up with Google, buy the nearest competitor.
Flickr would be a great acquisition for Microsoft, but if Flickr is generating enough revenue to keep and develop this service, I would rather it remain elsewhere. I understand the struggles of the startups, but I object to the ponderousness when megacompanies inhale smaller companies. So, I could move my flickr images to Picasa as a protest, but that would be lot of work and I would then simply be moving between what have become the two big players. There must be a sweet spot in there somewhere. How to protect it?
Some do disagree and see this as a way to encourage rather than discourage competition.
French researcher Jean Veronis reports the results of a study in which he asked students to generate search queries around designated themes and then rate the quality of the first link returned. The system submitted the searches to Google and Yahoo and students were unaware of the engine responsible for the link they evaluated. Satisfaction ratings slightly favored Google.
Other findings:
In 27% of searches, the link returned at the top of the list was the same.
A relatively large % of first links were to Wikipedia and the author reports that this has changed dramatically from previous implements of his research procedure.
The proportion of links to Wikipedia is perplexing and why the change? The researcher speculates the web is becoming more volatile (with blogs, etc.) and pagerank no longer may return what searchers regard as satisfactory hits. Wikipedia, in contrast, is safe and stable.
While a safe strategy, the researcher concludes that some may decide to simply point their browser to wikipedia for information searches rather than use the search sites we have come to know and love.
Interesting research method. Students looking for research projects might be able to use variations of this approach – e.g., search engines designed for young users vs. Google.
A new search engine – mahalo – has recently launched. The idea is to use guides (people) to identify the most useful sites.
The guides will attempt to locate:
1. … sites that are considered authorities in their field (i.e. Edmunds for autos, Engadget for consumer electronics, and the New York Times for news).
2. … sites which create original, high-quality content on a consistent basis.
3. … sites that have been operating for over one year. Sites under a year will be considered, but most will be placed in a “member-submitted” section at the bottom of the page until they hit the one-year mark.
4. … sites that have clean layout, design, and a modest amount of advertising.
If you feel worthy, you can submit your site for consideration.
I learned that “mahalo” is the Hawaiian word for thank-you on a recent trip. Not sure what the connection is here unless we are to be thankful that someone has eliminated unwanted “hits” from our searches.
Hasn’t this been tried a few times before and evidently without sufficient success to compete with Google? I get the idea, but I bet most people search for too many personal topics for an “expert-selected” approach to work on an everyday basis. For general topics when expertise/quality is an issue, the page rank system that considers the popularity of links to a site already considers the collective decisions of many web page authors. Why would a group of selected “guides” offer an advantage?
This sounds like a test of the collective intelligence vs. expert distinction that was at the core of “The Wisdom of Crowds”. I guess I think it is a good idea that new approaches are continually offered up.
Several months ago I highlighted Quintura – a search engine that generates both hits and a tag cloud in response to a query. The tag cloud allows the user to modify the original search (click on a tag) for more specific results.
Quintura now offers a beta version of Quintura for Kids. This site applies the same principles but offers what the company sees as a fun interface with suggested content areas not requiring an initial query and a a database of kid-friendly content. Traditional queries are also possible.
Quintura is developing a new search service that relies on a unique interface. The initial search requests returns “hits” and a tag cloud. Clicking on tags within the cloud both brings additional tags to the fore and allows tags to be added to the original search request for secondary searches.
I like the description of typical search as “recovery” and reliance on social tagging as discovery. This search approach appears to offer a combination.
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
