Map of Web Content By Perspective 79
An anonymous reader writes "Cruxlux has a perspective-based search engine up. It provides a map of results laid out by viewpoint. For example, querying 'Obama' shows a map with liberal blog posts, articles, and video clumped together, conservative stuff nearby, and nonpolitical sources farther away. It works for nonpolitical queries too (sports, etc.). It also lets you limit results to certain types of views — you can focus on hot 'Obama' content from a liberal angle, for instance."
RIAA (Score:5, Insightful)
They really have no friends anymore.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I went to high school with the RIAA, we were in A/V club together dammit
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
no that was religion class, in A/V we looked at porn
Try typing in Mickey Mouse... (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently it is supposed to be "smart" regarding politics, but at the same time it can't give a single relevant hit on Mickey Mouse.
OK... maybe there is on or two of those somewhere.
But I kinda like the search engine to give me information relevant to my query.
Great... (Score:2)
Now we have another tool to isolate people in their echo chambers!
Re:Great... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Great... (Score:5, Funny)
Excellent, there's no better way to break the internet feedback loop than by encouraging debate. People will bring their best rational arguments and exchange opinions in a frank, lucid manner. It's genius!
Re:Great... (Score:4, Funny)
STFU you stupid git
Re:Great... (Score:4, Interesting)
I just tested the site with a search on "trusted computing". I tried it both with and without quotes. I was rather puzzled to see results featuring the Sarah Palin scandal and nationalreview ranting "Don't trust the liberal media". I was only able to search through part of the results before the site froze up - Slashdot effect I assume - but I couldn't find a single result actually addressing Trusted Computing. As near as I can tell it simply targeted the 'trust' fragment of the search term.
-
Re: (Score:1)
I just tested the site with a search on "trusted computing". I tried it both with and without quotes. I was rather puzzled to see results featuring the Sarah Palin scandal and nationalreview ranting "Don't trust the liberal media". I was only able to search through part of the results before the site froze up - Slashdot effect I assume - but I couldn't find a single result actually addressing Trusted Computing. As near as I can tell it simply targeted the 'trust' fragment of the search term.
So what are you saying? You don't trust its computing prowess? You just found your "trusted computing" just not the way you thought you would and isn't that how we all view trusted computing? It represents itself in ways we don't expect nor like.
Re: (Score:2)
You need more data. And less liebrul bias. Man, I tried searching "Sarah" in sites like sex.com. Your site's response?
"Thanks for the new information
Our system didn't know about sex.com before. Thank you for feeding us a new site. "
If you can't place Sarah in sex.com context, man, what good is your site fer?
'Obama' content from a liberal angle (Score:2, Funny)
Also known as a progressive upskirt.
yes, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, these folks need to hire a graphic designer. That is one ugly, cluttered website. Far, far too much information to look at at one time, daunting to say the least. Google had the right idea with their interface. Less is more.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There's a fine balance between showing a lot of information at once, yet keeping it digestible.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the post is interesting, dipshit. That's a subjective moderation.
Re:yes, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
it seems to do quite well for results but the interface is terrible on a small screen. useless crap on the page when i am trying to look at the results. I don't
mind having to scroll up and down to see more results currently its like trying to look at a room through a letterbox. the results window needs to be bigger.
I don't mind the additions and suggestions dotted round the side before i search after they need to be moved or removed underneath would be ok.
I also couldn't find a way to open the results it would be preferable to open a link to the actual page in fact open several pages even.
The colors had no meaning to me I need to know what i am looking at.
if the colors classify the results as type e.g blogs forums wiki commercial vendor ect. i'd like a key to the colors.
biggest issue really was being unable to get at the results in any useful way.
one part sentence seemed to be all i could see.
on the otherhand the core idea looks good.
A pet hate of mine with google is the inability to seperate a search for a product from a search for information about a product also no way to filter out all the agregation sites which just say you can buy x here here and here and often x is y and not what i am looking for.
search is promising , results awful.
Re: (Score:1)
Try on google: myproduct -buy to search for product information and ignore the "buy" pages.
My impressions (Score:4, Interesting)
Terrible, hard to type name.
Messy interface. Yellow color scheme?
Small snippets to represent blogs (And I mean small visually, not small number of words).
The inset window blocks much of the search panel.
As far as I can tell, no attempt to group results by domain, that is stacking several relevant blog postings from same blog in adjoint rectangles.
Grade: F-
Re: (Score:2)
At least the server didn't collapse under the crushing weight of mighty Slashdot...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Please RTFA and then apologize.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
I apologize
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You know, I just realized that before the main content was loaded the page flashed "WE CAN SOLVE THE ULTIMATE CRISIS".
Yeah, this article - and the site - may just be a teeny bit slanted.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
So sorry to hear about your dead brain.
Good start (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Porn blogs! Great idea. Gives blogspot a whole new meaning.
very young service (Score:3, Informative)
I guess if you are searching for political/sports information its fine, as that seems to be the only types of blogs in the database. If you search for 'camping' for instance, there's almost no content about camping, and almost everything but a few items in the map are of a political nature. Interesting idea, but only of minimal use to anyone interested in anything other than sports or politics... for the moment anyhow.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If there were a current scandal with camping, it might be different!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
C++: Failed to get any results (mostly a test to see if "++" threw it off)
Perl: Expected: love it/hate it type clumping; Got: News articles mentioning perl, Ubuntu news, and lots of unclumped results
Anime: Expected: love it/hate it and blogs about the new series (i.e. current news); Got: Mostly unclumped "animal" type articles
Haiku: Expected: a couple articles about poetry, some
not sure how well it works (Score:2, Interesting)
It's also weird that they included uncyclopedia as a source. it would be fine in a normal search engine, but here the results seem to come from newspapers and blogs.
Re:not sure how well it works (Score:4, Insightful)
Without a guide about what the viewpoint is, I didn't find much use in it.
Search on Cruxlux for 'Obama McCain global warming' [cruxlux.com] and you get a hodgepodge of data back, with no indication what, if any, is relevant and having to dig to find anything that compares the two.
While Google [google.com] returned a very concise list of items on the first two pages.
Sorry Cruxlux ... not convinced I should stop using Google.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You might find it useful as a launching point to seeing all the different angles in one shot, which a standard search won't give you, or to get a nice spread of video and articles from a particular type of source, which again standard search isn't built for.
As for a guide on what view each cluster represents when you don't target the search -- right now, it wo
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry .. I didn't phrase my post well.
I did a search for opinions about something, and Google was far superior.
I won't be back to your site, it does not have any apparent benefits over the sites I'm using now, and in fact was far less useful. I do not wish to waste time trying to find usefulness in it.
Read what I did again and figure out how to give me what I want if you want me to use your site.
Unless my personal usage of your site doesn't matter. That's fair, in it's current form, your site doesn't ma
Re: (Score:1)
OK man, calm down, he was trying to be helpfull... shesh
Re: (Score:1)
worked for me (Score:1)
Great... (Score:1, Interesting)
... now it has become even more easy to stick one's head in the sand, or up one's own arse depending on preference, than it already was.
Content (Score:1)
I was wondering where I was going to get my "hot Obama content from a liberal angle"!
Re: (Score:1)
Not just spam... trolling spam (Score:3, Interesting)
This has to be a new low for Slashdot.
The evidence this is spam/slashvertisement:
And if being obvious spam/slashvertisement weren't bad enough, the summary is basically a giant Obama/McCain troll.
But hey, they managed to keep spelling and grammar mistakes to a minimum, so I guess that's something.
Re:Not just spam... trolling spam (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
While you're trying to be useful, can you fix the redirect loop of your Standford page. Firefox gave up after reaching http://cs.stanford.edu/~guhaj///////////////////// [stanford.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome to Slashdot, where an honest attempt to be transparent gets you labeled as a trolling spammer, and where an interesting idea gets tagged "crap" (as it currently is).
Why is it tagged "crap," anyway? Just 'cause it's a search engine that's not Google?
Yah, nice, asshole. (Score:1)
So, you're one of the developers of a search engine with a shitty UI and you are now trolling
What made you think that was a good idea? Everyone here are paranoid skeptics (disclosure: myself included). Welcome to the most asinine advertising decision you've ever made. If you wanted this to be successful here, you would have left it alone and let the discussion go unhindered by your trolling. I can't imagine what your other advertising avenues are. Did you start a Facebook
Re: (Score:1)
They? I thought it was only one person.
Promising technology (Score:1)
Bad Algorithm (Score:1)
It's dead (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah. Can someone who saw this before the site went down at least give us a car analogy or something?
Re: (Score:1)
Oh yah, and one of the developers is in the trunk to answer any questions or concerns you might have by trolling
My search for Obama... (Score:2)
...comes up as a ... well, a blank page.
Take that for what it's worth.
Try with real world query (Score:2)
Try doing a query other than one of the ones they suggest. Pick something you're particularly interested in or know a lot about. You'll see this thing does pretty much nothing useful.
only for news stories (Score:1)
Think it's only for news stories. TFA should have made that clearer.
yes exactly - TFA didn't say enough. It works good on stuff in the evening news, but not others. Someone upthread mentioned index goes back only 14 days.
UI?! (Score:2)
Ehm, that UI is a joke, right?
I mean, otherwise it looks like someone tried really, really hard here - and failed completely.
One Suggestion (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Wow (Score:2)
The intuitiveness of "Look what I can do with JavaScript!" Web 2.0 design principles, married to the visual aesthetic of circa 1993 "My cat's Homepage"-type sites.
The Internet is for Pr0n (Score:1)