[tmbchr]™

Why Should I Go To Web Pages?



Following up from my last mini-rant, it occurs to me: why should someone looking for information on a subject ever need to go to a web page to find that information?

That is, if you’re going to search for something on Google, you should be able to find it on Google. Think about it: if Google knows on which web pages the information you’re looking for can be found, then really you shouldn’t ever *need* to even visit that web page. You should just have the relevant information distilled (or digested) down for you from the source, and then if you want to expand your context on it, you can zip or zoom over to original source documents.

The more I think about this, the more it seems like a no-brainer. If I do a Google search, everything I need should be immediately at my fingertips when I get results returned to me. I shouldn’t need to then hit CTRL + F in FireFox (doing a redundant search!) and scan down pages to find the part that I want. It should just be delivered to me automatically. Why isn’t this happening? The technology is completely there. This is a major factor in why I use Wikipedia more and Google less for certain types of searches (the majority of them actually) nowadays.

[This also connects back somehow to my recent thoughts on RSS, re-purposing content and the future of PageRank]

,





7 Reader Responses

  1. speedbird Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 3:18 am

    > … if Google knows on which web pages the information you’re looking for can be found …

    I’m not sure it does. It knows the right ones but it also knows ten thousand other ones which are full of BS. Google cannot understand our requirements.

  2. Inestimable Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 4:49 am

    You should just have the relevant information distilled (or digested) down for you from the source, and then if you want to expand your context on it, you can zip or zoom over to original source documents.

    I’ve been having fun with ClipMarks for quite some time actually. It’s sort-of a reverse of what you’re asking for, but it definitely ‘does’ what you’re asking on some level. Reliant on websurfers to be the ones to distill this info but hey, it’s a start. :)

  3. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 5th, 2007 at 11:46 am

    I’m not sure it does. It knows the right ones but it also knows ten thousand other ones which are full of BS. Google cannot understand our requirements.

    Then it’s not a very good search engine, because that’s what I need and want out of one!

  4. speedbird Says:
    October 8th, 2007 at 11:01 am

    So if I need specialist information I go to an academic library or an academic bookseller. There’s a certain amount of custodianship of the information goes on, winnowing out of the useful stuff from the idle gossip. Performance librarianship. How we can get a computer tool to do this I’m not sure, but Wikipedia is likely a step in the right direction. Though I have found the most astonishing tosh on Wikipedia - and I’ve not always felt it’s worth correcting.

    Persuading new university students of the weaknesses of websearches can be surprisingly difficult.

  5. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 8th, 2007 at 11:46 am

    Persuading new university students of the weaknesses of websearches can be surprisingly difficult.

    You can’t persuade someone of weakness. It’s not a direct way of communication. Instead you must exemplify strength.

  6. speedbird Says:
    October 9th, 2007 at 3:34 am

    Is weakness really the same as ‘not-strength’?

    Do you think this has anything to do with the stuff in Matthew 5?

  7. Tim Boucher Says:
    October 9th, 2007 at 11:43 am

    Could you elaborate?



SURROUND YOURSELF WITH STRENGTH.