Hacker News Reader

Comment by zeugmasyllepsis | Hacker News Reader

In some sense that's kind of the point right? If Qwant isn't tracking user information than we _expect_ the results to be different, since the engine doesn't have a chance to build up an information bubble about its users.

View on HN

> If Qwant isn't tracking user information than we _expect_ the results to be different

We expect the answers to be correct. Google can use everything it knows about me to turn an abstract term like "giants" into SF Giants or New York Giants, but when I explicitly enter "san francisco giants" as part of a query and still get poor results, that is a failure.

If 2 pages have similar topics and coverage, and 1 is ranked higher on Google and the other higher on Qwant, who is "correct"? Search is a fuzzy thing, and while some results might be objectively, I challenge your notion of correctness.

There can be a number of queries where no context is required to give a relevant answer, because the query carries enough context. E.g.

    html5 working draft
    when new york city was founded
    aapl ticker
    us consulates in germany
    can i haz cheezeburger
    there is no spoon
    tyger tyger burning bright
    hurricane florence

I did not try any of these, though.

Different is fine, however I certainly don't expect my search results to be atrocious.

If tracking is going to give me much better results, seems worth it. Would a better positioning be "safe" tracking (whatever that would exactly mean)?

I'm not sure matching Google, but a little worse, is best objective.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com