logoalt Hacker News

lelandfetoday at 2:44 AM2 repliesview on HN

For instance, searching the quoted (random phrase) "pants butler" produces first page results like:

"pants,” Butler" and "pants...Butler" and "Pants - Butler's"

Second page loses it entirely, with results like "BUTLER SVC Green Back Country Cargo Pants" and another that seemingly lacks "butler" anywhere on the page.


Replies

whilenot-devtoday at 6:16 AM

There's a whole list of search operators: https://ahrefs.com/blog/google-advanced-search-operators/#li...

iamnotheretoday at 3:38 AM

I have also noticed this. Many other search engines have started doing it too.

If I had to guess, they are probably deferring to autocorrect if a quoted search doesn’t appear often enough to be notable and the distance to existing common tokens is small. This really sucks, because it means that you can’t search for uncommon things that are named similarly to common terms. Once upon a time it wasn’t like this.

A similar problem comes up if you want to clarify a common search with an uncommon term, like (made up example here) “German castle Tokyo”. Once upon a time you could quote the uncommon term or prefix it with a plus to force a narrowing of the results. This could find discussions or specific posts with unusual combinations of words, which was great when you knew were looking for something very specific and obscure. Now this hardly ever works, and instead they just ignore your extra term.

Sometimes the search engine “AI assistants” can find these things if you prompt correctly, which is maybe the most useful application of AI that I’ve found. But even then they often don’t seem to search that deeply, and often they will just assume that your query is invalid and gaslight you.