Google Search

COOOOOOOSMIIIIIIIIIC.

www.napoleon.org/

Results 1 - 10 of about 243,000 for "tits up". (0.09 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,310 for "teats up". (0.24 seconds)

Google search kinda sucks now. When you put in conditionals, it'll give you websites without them ... and it's like, why would I want those fucking websites? They don't contain any of the words I'm searching for.

Also if I put quotes round a name, I want that name, not common misspellings.

It's a pet peeve of mine, so I'm going to go into "Grandpa Simpson shaking fist at clouds" mode for just a moment.

How to misleadingly cite the results of a Google search:

Results 1 - 10 of about 9,720 for I wonder how many people dream about Sean Connery every night.
Results 1 - 10 of about 2,850 for orange vision eyebrow speculation bow.
Results 1 - 10 of about 749,000 for I listen to everything but country and rap.
Results 1 - 10 of about 20,500 for nipples so long and pointy that it becomes dangerous.

How to properly cite the results of a Google search, using quotation marks:

No results found for "I wonder how many people dream about Sean Connery every night".
No results found for "orange vision eyebrow speculation bow".
Results 1 - 10 of about 537 for "I listen to everything but country and rap".
No results found for "nipples so long and pointy that it becomes dangerous".

I'm not pointing fingers, I'm just saying...some of us here, and a million times more annoying, some journalists, don't really understand how google results are actually obtained.

/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3133/2754448357_d2de35817a.jpg?v=0

Wow!

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,800 for I'm not pointing fingers, I'm just saying...some of us here, and a million times more annoying, some journalists, don't really understand how google results are actually obtained..

Yelling at cloud but OTM nonetheless.

yeah, zs otm fwiw

39. Results 1 - 10 of about 79,400,000 for is krugman ever right?. (0.30 seconds)

this guy

And of course, http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Results+1+-+10+of+about%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

I can only hope that the next time other ILXors and journalists of the world want to write something about a google search result, they consult this thread first.

Results 1 - 10 of about 413 for Use the ILX search function, journalists!.

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for "gorging banshee". (0.22 seconds)

when i google "the department entire", that's what i google. not "the department's entire", fucktoads.

are you using quotes?

Yeah, Google has been a dick about this kind of thing for a while now.

i am using quotes. assholes. let's try bing.

bing does it right.

You can do it in Google via the advanced search btw. You have to tell it to ignore "department's entire".

dasein body sex
About 254,000 results (0.27 seconds)

Did you mean: ladies body sex

sublime who got the hooch

About 967,000 results (0.33 seconds)

No results found for "jesus fucking christ fucking mike pence".

For some reason the utter fucking wankers at Google have done something to the search where it just ignores some of the words in the query and doesn't even provide that little "must include all terms" tab they used to have

Hate what seems to be a brand-new change: big images and news stories come up first. I just searched Mookie Betts to get his Baseball Reference page; it used to be the first or second thing to come up, along with Wikipedia, now it's relegated to the second page of results.

Has anyone else been getting weird search results from DuckDuckGo lately? For example, I can enter the name of a website and none of the results will be the website's home page (whereas Google will give me the home page as first result). It's not always doing this but it's been happening enough lately for me to notice it.

vanilla search is so broken in mid-2024, feels like this is google's "00s MTV"-era (ie music television channel showing nothing but teen reality/game shows).