<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Anatomy of a bad search result</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:10:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bad Search Results &#124; Superposition Kitty</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5838</link>
		<dc:creator>Bad Search Results &#124; Superposition Kitty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:02:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5838</guid>
		<description>[...] Anatomy of a bad search result. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Anatomy of a bad search result. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jardenberg kommenterar &#8211; 2009-12-21 — jardenberg unedited</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5822</link>
		<dc:creator>jardenberg kommenterar &#8211; 2009-12-21 — jardenberg unedited</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:31:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5822</guid>
		<description>[...] Anatomy of a bad search result cdixon.org – chris dixon&#8217;s blog [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Anatomy of a bad search result cdixon.org – chris dixon&#8217;s blog [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scott</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5734</link>
		<dc:creator>scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 22:15:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5734</guid>
		<description>I think that&#039;s the wrong question.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;No one really wants a good dishwasher review. And they&#039;ll never get one, either, because a review is too easy to fake.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What we all really want is a good _dishwasher_, and word of mouth review is the tried and true method that people use to approximately measure how good a dishwasher is.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&quot;What&#039;s a good dishwasher? I dunno... &#039;Hey Bob, how&#039;s your dishwasher treating you?&#039;&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think we&#039;ll either fall back on real word of mouth (which is *incredibly* difficult to fake, unless you can clone my friends) or we&#039;ll solve the problem at a deeper level by mashing up a service that queries the Maytag repair ticket database :-)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It&#039;s a problem that really is begging us to cut out the middleman - it just needs a few companies who decide that they are going to be transparent and honest as part of their customer service strategy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that&#39;s the wrong question.</p>
<p>No one really wants a good dishwasher review. And they&#39;ll never get one, either, because a review is too easy to fake.</p>
<p>What we all really want is a good _dishwasher_, and word of mouth review is the tried and true method that people use to approximately measure how good a dishwasher is.</p>
<p>&#8220;What&#39;s a good dishwasher? I dunno&#8230; &#39;Hey Bob, how&#39;s your dishwasher treating you?&#39;&#8221;</p>
<p>I think we&#39;ll either fall back on real word of mouth (which is *incredibly* difficult to fake, unless you can clone my friends) or we&#39;ll solve the problem at a deeper level by mashing up a service that queries the Maytag repair ticket database <img src='http://cdixon.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>It&#39;s a problem that really is begging us to cut out the middleman &#8211; it just needs a few companies who decide that they are going to be transparent and honest as part of their customer service strategy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scott</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5733</link>
		<dc:creator>scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:55:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5733</guid>
		<description>&quot;We as humans are the most advanced AI, so to speak, which detects fraud.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It just doesn&#039;t make sense to refer to humans as &#039;the most advanced AI&#039;. That defies the very meaning of the term.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You&#039;re right that it&#039;s a game: this problem is entirely social, and because of that, I don&#039;t think it will end, however smart the tools get. You can think of it as the problem of building a model of what a &#039;good&#039; dishwasher result is. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The modeling tools for forgery get smart just as quickly as the tools for detection - they&#039;re the same problems! If the answer to that is, &quot;We should just let Google have all the good tools&quot;... well, that&#039;s not going to happen.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Where this is going, of course, is that eventually fake dishwasher review sites will be composed of coherent English dishwasher reviews that are indistinguishable from real reviews in every possible way. Except that they&#039;re fake. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The problem is social; it&#039;s that there&#039;s someone out there who is willing to lie and deceive us to make a buck. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But that&#039;s a *really* hard problem to solve, so I guess we&#039;re left with technical band-aids that will, eventually, peel off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;We as humans are the most advanced AI, so to speak, which detects fraud.&#8221;</p>
<p>It just doesn&#39;t make sense to refer to humans as &#39;the most advanced AI&#39;. That defies the very meaning of the term.</p>
<p>You&#39;re right that it&#39;s a game: this problem is entirely social, and because of that, I don&#39;t think it will end, however smart the tools get. You can think of it as the problem of building a model of what a &#39;good&#39; dishwasher result is. </p>
<p>The modeling tools for forgery get smart just as quickly as the tools for detection &#8211; they&#39;re the same problems! If the answer to that is, &#8220;We should just let Google have all the good tools&#8221;&#8230; well, that&#39;s not going to happen.</p>
<p>Where this is going, of course, is that eventually fake dishwasher review sites will be composed of coherent English dishwasher reviews that are indistinguishable from real reviews in every possible way. Except that they&#39;re fake. </p>
<p>The problem is social; it&#39;s that there&#39;s someone out there who is willing to lie and deceive us to make a buck. </p>
<p>But that&#39;s a *really* hard problem to solve, so I guess we&#39;re left with technical band-aids that will, eventually, peel off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scott</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5549</link>
		<dc:creator>scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 14:15:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5549</guid>
		<description>I think that&#039;s the wrong question.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;No one really wants a good dishwasher review. And they&#039;ll never get one, either, because a review is too easy to fake.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What we all really want is a good _dishwasher_, and word of mouth review is the tried and true method that people use to approximately measure how good a dishwasher is.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&quot;What&#039;s a good dishwasher? I dunno... &#039;Hey Bob, how&#039;s your dishwasher treating you?&#039;&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think we&#039;ll either fall back on real word of mouth (which is *incredibly* difficult to fake, unless you can clone my friends) or we&#039;ll solve the problem at a deeper level by mashing up a service that queries the Maytag repair ticket database :-)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It&#039;s a problem that really is begging us to cut out the middleman - it just needs a few companies who decide that they are going to be transparent and honest as part of their customer service strategy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that&#39;s the wrong question.</p>
<p>No one really wants a good dishwasher review. And they&#39;ll never get one, either, because a review is too easy to fake.</p>
<p>What we all really want is a good _dishwasher_, and word of mouth review is the tried and true method that people use to approximately measure how good a dishwasher is.</p>
<p>&#8220;What&#39;s a good dishwasher? I dunno&#8230; &#39;Hey Bob, how&#39;s your dishwasher treating you?&#39;&#8221;</p>
<p>I think we&#39;ll either fall back on real word of mouth (which is *incredibly* difficult to fake, unless you can clone my friends) or we&#39;ll solve the problem at a deeper level by mashing up a service that queries the Maytag repair ticket database <img src='http://cdixon.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>It&#39;s a problem that really is begging us to cut out the middleman &#8211; it just needs a few companies who decide that they are going to be transparent and honest as part of their customer service strategy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scott</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5548</link>
		<dc:creator>scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:55:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5548</guid>
		<description>&quot;We as humans are the most advanced AI, so to speak, which detects fraud.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It just doesn&#039;t make sense to refer to humans as &#039;the most advanced AI&#039;. That defies the very meaning of the term.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You&#039;re right that it&#039;s a game: this problem is entirely social, and because of that, I don&#039;t think it will end, however smart the tools get. You can think of it as the problem of building a model of what a &#039;good&#039; dishwasher result is. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The modeling tools for forgery get smart just as quickly as the tools for detection - they&#039;re the same problems! If the answer to that is, &quot;We should just let Google have all the good tools&quot;... well, that&#039;s not going to happen.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Where this is going, of course, is that eventually fake dishwasher review sites will be composed of coherent English dishwasher reviews that are indistinguishable from real reviews in every possible way. Except that they&#039;re fake. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The problem is social; it&#039;s that there&#039;s someone out there who is willing to lie and deceive us to make a buck. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But that&#039;s a *really* hard problem to solve, so I guess we&#039;re left with technical band-aids that will, eventually, peel off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;We as humans are the most advanced AI, so to speak, which detects fraud.&#8221;</p>
<p>It just doesn&#39;t make sense to refer to humans as &#39;the most advanced AI&#39;. That defies the very meaning of the term.</p>
<p>You&#39;re right that it&#39;s a game: this problem is entirely social, and because of that, I don&#39;t think it will end, however smart the tools get. You can think of it as the problem of building a model of what a &#39;good&#39; dishwasher result is. </p>
<p>The modeling tools for forgery get smart just as quickly as the tools for detection &#8211; they&#39;re the same problems! If the answer to that is, &#8220;We should just let Google have all the good tools&#8221;&#8230; well, that&#39;s not going to happen.</p>
<p>Where this is going, of course, is that eventually fake dishwasher review sites will be composed of coherent English dishwasher reviews that are indistinguishable from real reviews in every possible way. Except that they&#39;re fake. </p>
<p>The problem is social; it&#39;s that there&#39;s someone out there who is willing to lie and deceive us to make a buck. </p>
<p>But that&#39;s a *really* hard problem to solve, so I guess we&#39;re left with technical band-aids that will, eventually, peel off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Helen Driscoll</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5427</link>
		<dc:creator>Helen Driscoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 02:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5427</guid>
		<description>Another micro perspective: I have Google Alerts set for all our domain names. We registered 2 domains about 10 years ago, and in the past couple of years, the names have become popular key phrases. For about the past year, about 1/3 - 1/2 of the Alert results lead to a fake (gibberish) blog, affiliate spam blog, paid link post, scrapper blog, or some combination of these. At best, the content is really poor.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Big hint: most of the blog posts are written by &quot;admin&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another micro perspective: I have Google Alerts set for all our domain names. We registered 2 domains about 10 years ago, and in the past couple of years, the names have become popular key phrases. For about the past year, about 1/3 &#8211; 1/2 of the Alert results lead to a fake (gibberish) blog, affiliate spam blog, paid link post, scrapper blog, or some combination of these. At best, the content is really poor.</p>
<p>Big hint: most of the blog posts are written by &#8220;admin&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Two Comments Equal One Lazy Post &#171; New Economic Thought</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5402</link>
		<dc:creator>Two Comments Equal One Lazy Post &#171; New Economic Thought</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 22:03:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5402</guid>
		<description>[...] 27.12.2009 / 10pm CET (Link) Comment on &#8216;Anatomy of a bad search result&#8217; by Chris Dixon. It is and will be a game. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 27.12.2009 / 10pm CET (Link) Comment on &#8216;Anatomy of a bad search result&#8217; by Chris Dixon. It is and will be a game. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: michaeljung</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5401</link>
		<dc:creator>michaeljung</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5401</guid>
		<description>What would be a good search result for &quot;dishwasher reviews&quot;?&lt;br&gt;- Jason Calacanis talked about it, why he started &lt;a href=&quot;http://mahalo.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;mahalo.com&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;He showed MSFT and Google search results and curated search results in a blind ABC testing. And all investors said, C (curated) was best.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Sure, this can be done only with the most popular searches, 3-5 million!? You can&#039;t scale curation like stacking up CPUs.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And on a side note, reading @jonathanmendez mentioning Amazon, yes, Amazon is looking at its user data too, thus coming up with recommendations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What would be a good search result for &#8220;dishwasher reviews&#8221;?<br />- Jason Calacanis talked about it, why he started <a href="http://mahalo.com" rel="nofollow">mahalo.com</a>.</p>
<p>He showed MSFT and Google search results and curated search results in a blind ABC testing. And all investors said, C (curated) was best.</p>
<p>Sure, this can be done only with the most popular searches, 3-5 million!? You can&#39;t scale curation like stacking up CPUs.</p>
<p>And on a side note, reading @jonathanmendez mentioning Amazon, yes, Amazon is looking at its user data too, thus coming up with recommendations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ldii</title>
		<link>http://cdixon.org/2009/12/19/anatomy-of-a-bad-search-result/comment-page-1/#comment-5366</link>
		<dc:creator>ldii</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2009 17:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdixon.org/?p=2240#comment-5366</guid>
		<description>Great analysis. I don&#039;t think it&#039;s a bad example. Isn&#039;t it the core of SEO: keywords and links?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great analysis. I don&#39;t think it&#39;s a bad example. Isn&#39;t it the core of SEO: keywords and links?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.143 seconds -->
