Skip to main content

The Ancient and Venerable Art of Google-fu

Other titles considered for this post: How Not To Piss Off Entire Forums and Facebook Groups; Avoiding the Banhammer; Stop Being Lazy and Look it Up Yourselves.

Before you can embark on a career in, well, anything even vaguely IT related (or do practically anything), you must master one crucial skill: information searching. In the days of yore, and even rumoured to still exist despite budget cuts, there were in of cult of specialists in this area, who guarded their domains jealously: the librarians. These knowledge-fanatics could divine what you were looking for from the ridiculously poor and mumbled explanation you gave them, then translated that into a secretive code which led you to a shelf in a library, and then to the book you were after. Just like magic.

These days, while librarians are still a vitally important part of cataloguing knowledge, we also have another, less mystical, tool at our fingertips: the Search Engine. Unfortunately, very few people have bothered to learn how to ask these data crawlers for the right information, leaving to much confusion and clogged-up posts asking other people for something a quick search, done properly, would have revealed. This then leads to arguments and admins swinging Banhammers around like an enraged blacksmith.

Which brings us to the point of this post: What is Google-fu? How can it help me?

Put simply, Google-fu is an slang term for being able to use a search engine and get the desired result almost every time. Or magic, for the uninitiated. It's about understanding what you want, knowing how search engines work and matching these things together to get an answer. You might think "I can already do that", but if that was true, you wouldn't keep asking inane questions on forums trying to work out the simplest query. 

I'm not going to go into depth about the algorithms that power Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo or others, you can do that yourselves. The basics are quite simple: they use indexes, compiled from SEO data, tags, labels, search descriptions and site metadata, to form a list of results that match, to a greater percentage than others, your query terms. Naturally, it gets more complex from there, but that's the gist of it.

In the good old days of the Internet, before the ideas that formed the semantic web (an idea that would bring web searching and other functions together with a form of natural language processing) were considered close to reality, Boolean logic was god. AND, OR, NOT, NOR logic functions were instrumental in finding what you wanted from a search with any reasonable degree of speed or accuracy. Now, while we do have a more responsive search algorithm being used, Boolean logic isn't necessary, although it can be helpful, not just in the search itself, but while formulating the search.

Here's the crux of this post: I'm sick of people not looking for things on their own, and asking in groups and forums that are for discussions about Cyber Security or IT about simple things a quick search should tell you. I'm beginning to think that not only are these kinds of people lazy, but also ignorant of just how to search. So here's my quick guide to getting out of my hair and not getting banhammered:

Step the First: Figure out what you are searching for. Basically, work out what information you are after, then break the search down into terms as specific as you can be. If you are unsure, start with a look on Wikipedia about the topic, that might help narrow it down.

Next Step: Grab a thesaurus. If you are still struggling to find what you need, try to find synonyms that you can use instead of the terms you are using. Try switching the order of words around too.

Step the Third: Information Validation. This can be the trickiest bit, working out which resource is the most reliable. If the information is correct, you can usually corroborate it on another resource. Checking the URL validity is important too: a website ending in .co.uk or .gov is more likely to be reliable, over a URL that ends in .com.uk.tv or other such ridiculousness. Recommendations from other people can be good, as are company websites. Wikipedia might have a reputation for being an unruly free-for-all, but the citations and references can point you in the right direction. It's also worth getting your head around the concept of bias, as you'll find it almost everywhere, not just in journalism or advertising.

I hope this has helped, if it has, share it around.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

This is not a New Year’s Resolution

I'm not a one for resolutions or anything, I prefer to at least try to be a bit more practical than that. Instead, now that I've had time to consider what I want to do this year, here my list of upcoming projects. Let me know what yours are: 1) Re-evaluate the website and blog, and actually keep to a posting schedule. Might help if I started using artwork/photos. 2) Social Media application for my desktop: I'm getting a bit sick of having and average of 20 browser tabs open at a time, so lets see if I can't design an app, even if it's just a fixed browser thing, I can use to track my SM activity in one place so it's not clogging up my precious browser memory. 3) Stop wasting time with my writing projects: My biggest issue here is that while I can write some flowery prose or engage in worldbuilding like I'm Slartibartfast, I don't actually have a tale to tell. I need to adjust my focus here, and maybe I'll get something out of it. 4) Top Secre...

The Cultural Value of Algorithms

I am aware that there are misgivings amongst the musical community about Spotify's business model, and from the bits I know, these are perfectly reasonable. Unfortunately, it is useful and productive consumer model, and it's this I want to briefly write at you about. Spotify's catalogue is huge, an ever-expanding horizon that seems to want to engulf the soundscape in totality. It's easy to use, and you can usually find the album or artist you want to listen to. But it's true genius is in its algorithms, specifically the ones it uses to create the playlist it constantly nudges you to listen to. Now, because of how pushy it seemed, I avoided my Discover Weekly and Release Radar playlist like the plague for ages. This was a mistake. Or maybe, because I hadn't listened and followed enough, they just weren't right for me yet. Now, however, I spend a good two days paying attention to them, and then expanding my aural sphere to at least 3 of the recommend...

You and who’s party?

“I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member” Groucho Marx Much of the past 17 years has been dedicated to fighting fundamentalist extremism, largely of the religious persuasion. This is understandable, as the religious mindset, certainly in those areas of the globe where faith is a majority holding, affects and informs the cultural values of society, and certainly in the West we have found ourselves at odds with extremist Islamic groups. Fundies of the Muslim persuasion have been at the forefront f these combative efforts, although we have also seen the dangers of the looming Christian theocratic state. It is fair to say while this will be an ongoing struggle, it is one we are coming to understand very well and are able to combat. But what of other types of fundamentalist creeds? What of political fundamentalism? This is, I fear, something we are neglecting to talk about, instead preferring to remain steadfastly tribalised to the point where discuss...