Log in

No account? Create an account
Bax finally appreciates Googlewhacking -- briefly - Baxil [bakh-HEEL'], n. My Sites [Tomorrowlands] [The TTU Wiki] [Photos]
View My LJ [By Tag]

January 31st, 2002
06:28 am
[User Picture]


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Bax finally appreciates Googlewhacking -- briefly
[Googlewhacking resources, in case you've never heard of this thing before: unblinking * metafilter * story on c*net]

The one thing I never did with One-Hit Wonder that Googlewhacking has tempted me with ... has been the search for a low score.

OHW never had rules prohibiting lame searches like "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa pectoral", only a scoring system that penalized them. Googlewhacking not only has constraints on the search terms (must be valid dictionary words), but also constraints on the results (must not be a "list of difficult words" page), and a measurable metric for "lowest score" (since it doesn't bottom out at 1, but rather a*b).

And I've found a legitimate Googlewhack under 100,000 points.

nurseling ailurophobe. Both words are in the dictionary. The result page is an essay on cats in vaudeville. Score: 259 * 214 = 55,426.

I'm done now, unless someone finds a way to go any lower.

(UPDATE: Looks like the current lowest score submitted anywhere is currently "zebrula zedonk", from "mr_crash_davis" at the Metafilter link above, scoring 13,516 points. I'm still done, unless someone breaks 1e4.)

Current Mood: smug
Current Music: (none -- need to get to bed)

(5 comments | Leave a comment)

Date:January 31st, 2002 09:53 pm (UTC)

Well, that seems kind of silly. I mean, anyone can choose two rarely used words and get 'em to come together right. What about taking two common words and getting one hit?

Googlewhacking should reward really -high- scores.

Anyway, here's one for ya -- "angora triskaidekaphobia"
Date:January 31st, 2002 10:12 pm (UTC)
OKay, never mind, apparently that is the goal and you've just gone off on your own strange modification to it? I dunno. Whatever. Sleep now. :)
[User Picture]
Date:February 1st, 2002 02:30 am (UTC)
Pretty much ;)

Most people go for the high-scoring thing. As I mention in my previous post, though, my prior OHW experience made that seem dull, so the only real challenge I had left was low scores -- which actually seems about as difficult as high scores, given the rule restrictions.
[User Picture]
Date:February 1st, 2002 02:22 am (UTC)

"angora triskaidekaphobia"

Googlewhacks apparently are scored by multiplying together the two individual words' scores -- i.e., search ONLY for angora, and you get "about 106,000" results; search ONLY for triskaidekaphobia, and you get "about 1,670" results. Those two "uncommon" words, as a Googlewhack, score about 170,000,000 points, _4 orders of magnitude_ higher than the zerbroglie zedoink pair. (whatever they were)

Maybe now you see part of the problem in trying to find uncommon words. ;)

The other difficulty is that, as you start using words that are more and more obscure, your chances of finding them on an obscure word list shoot up exponentially. For example, pnigophobia philately (even though it's not a Googlewhack anyway, because pnigophobia isn't underlined in the summary bar -- meaning dictionary.com doesn't recognize it) returns a word list and is thus not valid.
Date:February 6th, 2002 01:51 pm (UTC)
I happened to search 'flaming monkey.' It wasn't exactly noteasble, as far as points go... but I found a hard-core Christian punk site: http://www.geocities.com/lizsjosh/

Question marks don't come in the appropriate size.
Tomorrowlands Powered by LiveJournal.com