Sunday, May 06, 2007

More Google strangeness

I was looking at this old article by Tom Wolfe that appeared on "Wicked Dox" a few days ago. I decided to see where else it was available on the internet. The answer varied a lot according to which search term is used. If I used the string "adroitly papering over the fact that the Nazis" -- which is a phrase found well into the body of the article -- I found no full copies of the article available anywhere. If however I used the string "Did a single historian mention that America now dominates the world" -- which is from the beginning of the article -- I found various full copies of the article (e.g. here).

So what are we to conclude from that? I think Google must be working on the assumption that they only need to store the first bit of a long article to be able to retrieve references to it. So the Lesson is? Break your writings up into lots of small documents, I guess. Good for bloggers if for no-one else!

I usually don't use a string from early in the article if I am searching for it -- as your search results get cluttered up with a whole lot of partial quotations from the article that way. A search for text occurring well into the body of the article is much more likely to lead you straight to a full copy of the article. But I guess I will have to change my ways in future.

I think Google should announce how much of a given article they are likely to store but I guess I am pissing into the wind with that hope. How they hope to store all the world's books when they cannot store what is already on the internet quite escapes me. The only things they seem to store comprehensively are blogs -- rather strangely. I am the last one to bad-mouth blogs but they are hardly the last word in information. I can think of many that are the last word in crap.

The results of Google searches vary from day to day and from hour to hour so whether anyone else gets the same results as I did above remains to be seen, of course. They did not have the Wicked Dox article at all when I searched but seeing that it is on a blog, they should pick it up fairly quickly. Google make us bloggers into the elite of the internet so perhaps I should not criticize them at all! It seems a pity that they are such a poor guide to the net, though. And the biggest pity is that most people don't realize that.

******************************

ELSEWHERE

The U.S. Army brass seems to have climbed down from their opposition to military bloggers.

Doug Ross has a good post contrasting Democrat and Republican standards of behavior. Where President Bush consistently behaves like the Christian gentleman that he is, the Democrats usually display no scruples at all. Like the Jihadis, they see decency as a sign of weakness. I particularly liked Doug's details about voting abuses.

John Bolton's speech on America's unprincipled bureaucracy is not to be missed.

Bill Clinton has warned about the dangers facing the United States. They are apparently "worldwide famine" and "obesity" (!!!). (H/T Newsbuckit)

With Unemployment Rate Lower Than the 1990's... Media Spins Negative: "Today's New York Times' headline: "Economy Adds Fewer Jobs Than Expected". You'd think the employment situation was horrible from this and otherheadlines this morning. However... The current unemployment rate stands at 4.5%- over 1 full point lower than the 5.7% average during the 1990's. How many people do you suppose have heard that fact?"

Ace has a very sarcastic comment on a pathetic attempt by the "L.A. Times" to smear Fred Thompson. Patterico also has some good comments on the matter.

Sharia courts already operating in Britain: "Muslim radicals have established their own draconian court systems in Britain. Controversial Sharia courts have been set up in major towns and cities to impose Islamic law and enable Muslims to shun the legitimate British legal system. Last night religious leaders and politicians expressed outrage that Sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in our society. Critics insisted that the Govern-ment is allowing a two-tier legal system to flourish in the name of political correctness and that the authority of UK justice is being undermined. The Daily Express can reveal that one of the controversial courts has been set up in the home town of the 7/7 London bombings ringleader. The Dewsbury court is called the Sharee Council - another term for Sharia - and operates as a Muslim judiciary making decisions by which attendees must abide. Non-Muslims are excluded from the secretive court which is registered as a charity to receive British tax benefits. Although the court has no official legal standing, scales of justice adorn a sign outside a former pub building which has been converted by the Islamic Institute of Great Britain."

Chutzpah: "The head of the Episcopal Church, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, is complaining about Nigerian Anglican bishops coming to Virginia this weekend to formally install the head of the conservative breakaway denomination in this country. Here's what she said: "Such action would violate the ancient customs of the church." I kid you not. The female head of a church with a practicing homosexual bishop planning to "marry" his lover, a church that could accept into seminary the adulterous homosexual governor of New Jersey, a church that embraces splitting open babies' skulls and vacuuming their brains out, is complaining about violating ancient customs? Wow."

A VERY flashy black: "Frederick Chiluba, the former President of Zambia, has been found guilty by a British High Court judge of plundering 23 million pounds from his people. He used the stolen money to indulge his taste for clothes, jewellery, cars, luxury homes and handmade high-heeled shoes to boost his 5ft height. His people, meanwhile, were struggling to live on an average of 50 pence a day. Chiluba spent at least 600,000 pounds on designer clothes bearing his FJT monogram, representing his names Frederick Jacob Titus, Mr Justice Peter Smith said after a two-year legal battle and a four-month trial. "The most telling example of corruption," he said, "was the clothing acquired by FJT". The former President "had a worldwide reputation as being a smart and expensive dresser. He had his own stylish suits with his initials, FJT, monogrammed on them, a large number of specially made signature shoes and thousands of monogrammed shirts." During Chiluba's ten years in office, from 1991 to 2001, 600,000 pounds was spent at Basile, an exclusive Swiss clothes shop, all of which was stolen from the republic."

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, IMMIGRATION WATCH and EYE ON BRITAIN.

List of backup or "mirror" sites here or here -- for readers in China or for everyone when blogspot is "down" or failing to update. Email me here (Hotmail address). My Home Pages are here or here or here

****************************

"Why should the German be interested in the liberation of the Jew, if the Jew is not interested in the liberation of the German?... We recognize in Judaism, therefore, a general anti-social element of the present time... In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism.... Indeed, in North America, the practical domination of Judaism over the Christian world has achieved as its unambiguous and normal expression that the preaching of the Gospel itself and the Christian ministry have become articles of trade... Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist". Who said that? Hitler? No. It was Karl Marx. See also here and here.

The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch) and the full name of Hitler's political party (translated) was "The National Socialist German Workers' Party".

****************************

1 comment:

Tim (Random Observations) said...

I've noticed Google's strangeness as well -- once, in fact, looking for something on your blog. Adding or removing a word frequently seems to generate a rather different set of results.