I frowned at Google the other day. Not because of Chrome, although I'll get to that in a minute, but because Google - the search engine bit - wasn't being helpful.
It was trying, but failing.
It's a work example, but I hope you'll bear with me.
On Monday I looked up drycooler. I'm not a fan of them (engineers will, at this point, have to excuse the pun. everyone else, please carry on), they're inefficient but small.
Due to the unique way the google' 'history' function is wired and if you have it enabled, you'll get a different set of results to me when you click on that link. Chances are you haven't looked for them before, so this will be google's first stab at getting you what you want - Classic Google algorithm, original recipe.
Tuesday I looked them up again, and the page was different. The first page of results was thick with the links I'd clicked from Monday's results, regardless of where they'd been in the original line up.
Which would be great, if I was looking for the exact same information that interested me before, when in fact I was deliberately looking for more models, from more manufacturers, so it took me a while to get to the stuff I wanted.
"Ah, foolish Stuart," I hear you pointedly remark, "The Mighty Google has sorted all these things for you! Click one results page back and you'll be in virgin internet territory! Amen."
And you would have a point.
After a year of using google for my product searches, I will have enormously skewed my preferred results towards vendors I use a lot; the big equipment manufacturers that dominate the American market, and they will handily spring to the fore each time. But what is going on in that selection process? Are European vendors being screened out because I usually look at US sites, from a computer in the US? Is something I searched for in my lunch hour going to affect my work searches?
If at 12.30 one day I search for 'Nike Air', look for fares on 'US Air', read a funny story in a pictureless Reuters 'Funnily Enough' story and then have to look up 'hot air balloon shaped like a banana' how are those 'air' themed searches affecting my 4.30pm hunt for 'steam air humidification systems absorption rate'?
It seems that making suggestions based on previous 'satisfactory' results is a narrowing-down of the possibilities of the internet. Chrome's built-in 'omnibar' suggests results as you type -from your previous history and 'popular sites even if you haven't visited them'...which could in future be google advertisers. Paid ads are clearly defined though the google.com interface, but not yet in the address bar suggestions...
I'm having difficulty articulating my problems with this, apart from the fact that it raises my net neutrality hackles - no one should be limiting your access to the internet, not even your past self.
Google History is an optional 'feature' that I've now turned off, but it seems to be somewhat warped way to run a search engine that can be adapted to so many unpredictable purposes by the same user. I think Google needs to worry less about giving people what they might want, and work on improving the ways in which they can do what they like.
Tools like calculator, the unit conversion aspect of which is a favourite of mine, the almost-but-not-quite-awesome "define:" function... things like that are turning google into a powerful query responder in its own right, not just a gateway to other people's information.
Trying to narrow that portal to point at a particular type of information can only be a bad move. Even if it's only a little more work to get at what you want, it's still a restriction.
I know what you mean ... but I'm not sure if it's bad thing.
Say you always search for apples (the fruit). Then what's relevant to you is fruit. The day you want computers, it wont be easy easy to find, but the reality is this is less relevant to you. So you need to search for "apple computers" which then brings back non fruit results.
This seems like the right behaviour to me.
Now if you normal search for apples the fruit and suddenly you start searching for dates. This doesn't necessarily mean that the fruit is more relevant to you than dating sites. Not the best analogy I know but I'm tired.
So I think you have a point about crossing over results but less so about modifying them in general. Google says they serve relevance and your history can make this more accurate. I would tend to agree with them.
However I do agree that if you only show me what I like then discoverability is lowered. It's a balance to keep the two ... well in balance.
...and I suppose there's a difference between a beneficially motivated reduction in 'discoverability' and a fiscally/self-interestedly motivated reduction, as presented by non-net-neutral ISPs.
Good point.
I still don't like it though.