Comment by nwienert | Hacker News Reader

Comment by nwienert | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

How to build the next Google: all good results these days are within communities, and Google search has become useless for most of these searches.

So don't build a search engine: build a "rotten tomatoes for X" where the sources for each X are "the top N subreddits/communities/editorial-sites/forums for X".

For example, supplements: examine.com, reddit /r/supplements /r/nootropics (long tail ones), wikipedia, etc.

Then, final piece: make this aggregator site also a community (ala reddit/hn) where people vote on the results rankings, but also vote on how other people comment on them. Because you can lock down user accounts quite a bit (have high bar for registration with lots of verification for voting permissions), and you have a quality indictor for the users themselves (users voting on users), you may get much better results over time as the community sorts out who are legit and who isn't.

I'm not saying any system is immune to optimization/spam, but it feels like Reddit, HN, SO, Wikipedia at least prove that if you want good quality content, rely on a community. Why not extend the model to search itself?

I think wikipedia, HN, etc. are less suseptible because people don't use those sites as heavily to make purchasing decisions. Any community that helps with purchasing will be targeted by those interested in sales who figure out how to meet the "high bar" no matter what that may be. Even purchase verification isn't high enough these days (see recent unsolicited package scams such as the seeds from China).

I agree with you: It's a numbers game. There is a cost associated with driving up good reviews for a (bad) product. A website such as this has to cause higher costs for fake reviews than what they can reap via it.

However, at some point the whole review process might become unusable for legitimate users, resulting in too few reviews, rendering the whole endeavour futile.

E.g. if a shitty product earns a seller 20US$, and they expect to sell exactly 100 more over a site like this, then they can easily invest 1000 US$ into trying to make their product seem good, even if it isn't.

Thinking of this, by that reasoning a non-negligible part of the high cost of good quality products might also stem from the fact that advertising genuinely good quality must be expensive like hell (I guess).

I had a similar idea: build a kind of "stackexchange" of search engines. You start with a "generic" search engine infrastructure, and each community runs its own instance, tweaked accordingly. This would mean:

* The community chooses what goes in the search database, the rules for the crawler etc.

* People in the community can vote on stuff, etc.

* The engine can be customized to have some "semantic" understanding of what is scraped (i.e. on a math-oriented instance, it would understand latex, in a cooking one, it would be able to parse recipes if they respect schema.org).

I really believe in this kind of concept of "user curated, community oriented" search engine, since this means taking pretty much the opposite approach to what google does, thus:

* this wouldn't compete on google's own ground ==> higher chances of success.

* you could keep more control on the data

* the engine wouldn't pull any tricks on you by trying to overfit what you meant

* lots of customization options, etc.

But I never had the energy to try and start something with the idea…

Yep! Well put too. You should reach out, I don’t see contact info for you but I’ve been exploring a version of it I believe has potential to work.

And then Google surfaces that data in their results so no one even needs to go to your site...

https://theoutline.com/post/1399/how-google-ate-celebritynet...

Different problem because your value is in the index not the content.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com