←back to thread

768 points cyndunlop | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
ChuckMcM ◴[] No.43106098[source]
As a systems enthusiast I enjoy articles like this. It is really easy to get into the mindset of "this must be perfect".

In the Blekko search engine back end we built an index that was 'eventually consistent' which allowed updates to the index to be propagated to the user facing index more quickly, at the expense that two users doing the exact same query would get slightly different results. If they kept doing those same queries they would eventually get the exact same results.

Systems like this bring in a lot of control systems theory because they have the potential to oscillate if there is positive feedback (and in search engines that positive feedback comes from the ranker which is looking at which link you clicked and giving it a higher weight) and it is important that they not go crazy. Some of the most interesting, and most subtle, algorithm work was done keeping that system "critically damped" so that it would converge quickly.

Reading this description of how user's timelines are sharded and the same sorts of feedback loops (in this case 'likes' or 'reposts') sounds like a pretty interesting problem space to explore.

replies(7): >>43106334 #>>43106982 #>>43107018 #>>43107888 #>>43110527 #>>43114706 #>>43116290 #
culi ◴[] No.43106334[source]
What became of Blekko?
replies(1): >>43106738 #
an_ko ◴[] No.43106738[source]
> It was acquired by IBM in March 2015, and the service was discontinued.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blekko

Perhaps GP has a more interesting answer though.

replies(1): >>43108177 #
ChuckMcM ◴[] No.43108177[source]
That's the correct answer, IBM wanted the crawler mostly to feed Watson. Building a full search engine (crawler, indexer, ranker, API, web application) for the English language was a hell of an accomplishment but by the time Blekko was acquired Google was paying out tens of billions of dollars to people to send them and only them their search queries. For a service that nominally has to live on advertising revenue getting humans to use it was the only way to be net profitable, and you can't spend billions buying traffic and hope to make it back on advertising as the #3 search engine in the English speaking markets.

There are other ways to monetize search (look at Kagi for example) than advertising. Blekko missed that window though. (too early, Google needed to get a crappy as it is today to make the value of a spam free search engine desirable)

replies(2): >>43108467 #>>43111123 #
chrisweekly ◴[] No.43108467[source]
Not my Q but thanks for the interesting history.

Also, (for other readers), I'm a huge fan of Kagi. Highly recommended.

replies(1): >>43111842 #
1. NetOpWibby ◴[] No.43111842[source]
I really thought Neeva was gonna make it. I'm glad Kagi swooped in when they exited.