Search Results

Search found 19563 results on 783 pages for 'binary search'.

Page 5/783 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Personal search – the future of search

    - by jamiet
    [Four months ago I wrote a meandering blog post on another blogging site entitled Personal search – the future of search. The points I made therein are becoming more relevant to what I'm reading about and hoping to get involved in in the future so I'm re-posting here to a wider audience to hopefully get some more feedback and guage reaction to it. This has been prompted by the book Pull by David Siegel that is forming my current holiday reading (recommended to me by a commenter on my previous post Interesting things – Twitter annotations and your phone as a web server) and in particular by Siegel's notion of us all in the future having a personal online data vault.] My one-time colleague Paul Dawson recently wrote an article called The Future of Search and in it he proposed some interesting ideas. Some choice quotes: The growth of Chinese search giant Baidu is an indicator that fully localised and tailored content and offerings have great traction with local audiences This trend is already driving an increase in the use of specialist searches … Look at how Farecast is now integrated into Bing for example, or how Flightstats is now integrated into Google. Search does not necessarily have to begin with a keyword, but could start instead with a click or a touch. Take a look at Retrievr. Start drawing a picture in the box and see what happens. This is certainly search without the need for typing in keywords search technology has advanced greatly in recent years. The recent launch of Microsoft Live Labs’ Pivot has given us a taste of what we can expect to see in the future This really got me thinking about where search might go in the future and as my mind wandered I realised that as the amount of data that we collect about ourselves increases so too will the need and the desire to search it. The amount of electronic data that exists about each and every person is increasing and in the near future I fully expect that we are going to be able to store personal data such as: A history of our location (in fact Google Latitude already offers this facility) Recordings of all our phone conversations Health information history (weight, blood pressure etc…) Energy usage Spending history What films we watch, what radio stations we listen to Voting history Of course, most of this stuff is already stored somewhere but crucially we don’t have easy access to it. My utilities supplier knows how much electricity I’m using but if I want to know for myself I have to go and dig through my statements (assuming I have kept them). Similarly my doctor probably has ready access to all of my health records, my bank knows exactly what I have spent my money on, my cable supplier knows what I watch on TV and my mobile phone supplier probably knows exactly where I am and where I’ve been for the past few years. Strange then that none of this electronic information is available to me in a way that I can really make use of it; after all, its MY information. Its MY data. I created it. That is set to change. As technologies mature and customers become more technically cognizant they will demand more access to the data that companies hold about them. The companies themselves will realise the benefit that they derive from giving users what they want and will embrace ways of providing it. As a result the amount of data that we store about ourselves is going to increase exponentially and the desire to search and derive value from that data is going to grow with it; we are about to enter the era of the “personal datastore” and we will want, and need, to search through it in order to make sense of it all. Its interesting then that today when we think of search we think of search engines and yet in these personal datastores we’re referring to data that search engines can’t touch because WE own it and we (hopefully) choose to keep it private. Someone, I know not who, is going to lead in this space by making it easy for us to search our data and retrieve information that we have either forgotten or maybe didn’t even know in the first place. We will learn new things about ourselves and about our habits; we will share these findings with whomever we choose; we will compare what we discover with others; we will collaborate for mutual benefit and, most of all, we will educate ourselves as to how to live our lives better. Search will be the means to that end, it will enable us to make sense of the wealth of information that we will collect day in day out. The future of search is personal, why would we be interested in anything else? @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Personal search – the future of search

    - by jamiet
    [Four months ago I wrote a meandering blog post on another blogging site entitled Personal search – the future of search. The points I made therein are becoming more relevant to what I'm reading about and hoping to get involved in in the future so I'm re-posting here to a wider audience to hopefully get some more feedback and guage reaction to it. This has been prompted by the book Pull by David Siegel that is forming my current holiday reading (recommended to me by a commenter on my previous post Interesting things – Twitter annotations and your phone as a web server) and in particular by Siegel's notion of us all in the future having a personal online data vault.] My one-time colleague Paul Dawson recently wrote an article called The Future of Search and in it he proposed some interesting ideas. Some choice quotes: The growth of Chinese search giant Baidu is an indicator that fully localised and tailored content and offerings have great traction with local audiences This trend is already driving an increase in the use of specialist searches … Look at how Farecast is now integrated into Bing for example, or how Flightstats is now integrated into Google. Search does not necessarily have to begin with a keyword, but could start instead with a click or a touch. Take a look at Retrievr. Start drawing a picture in the box and see what happens. This is certainly search without the need for typing in keywords search technology has advanced greatly in recent years. The recent launch of Microsoft Live Labs’ Pivot has given us a taste of what we can expect to see in the future This really got me thinking about where search might go in the future and as my mind wandered I realised that as the amount of data that we collect about ourselves increases so too will the need and the desire to search it. The amount of electronic data that exists about each and every person is increasing and in the near future I fully expect that we are going to be able to store personal data such as: A history of our location (in fact Google Latitude already offers this facility) Recordings of all our phone conversations Health information history (weight, blood pressure etc…) Energy usage Spending history What films we watch, what radio stations we listen to Voting history Of course, most of this stuff is already stored somewhere but crucially we don’t have easy access to it. My utilities supplier knows how much electricity I’m using but if I want to know for myself I have to go and dig through my statements (assuming I have kept them). Similarly my doctor probably has ready access to all of my health records, my bank knows exactly what I have spent my money on, my cable supplier knows what I watch on TV and my mobile phone supplier probably knows exactly where I am and where I’ve been for the past few years. Strange then that none of this electronic information is available to me in a way that I can really make use of it; after all, its MY information. Its MY data. I created it. That is set to change. As technologies mature and customers become more technically cognizant they will demand more access to the data that companies hold about them. The companies themselves will realise the benefit that they derive from giving users what they want and will embrace ways of providing it. As a result the amount of data that we store about ourselves is going to increase exponentially and the desire to search and derive value from that data is going to grow with it; we are about to enter the era of the “personal datastore” and we will want, and need, to search through it in order to make sense of it all. Its interesting then that today when we think of search we think of search engines and yet in these personal datastores we’re referring to data that search engines can’t touch because WE own it and we (hopefully) choose to keep it private. Someone, I know not who, is going to lead in this space by making it easy for us to search our data and retrieve information that we have either forgotten or maybe didn’t even know in the first place. We will learn new things about ourselves and about our habits; we will share these findings with whomever we choose; we will compare what we discover with others; we will collaborate for mutual benefit and, most of all, we will educate ourselves as to how to live our lives better. Search will be the means to that end, it will enable us to make sense of the wealth of information that we will collect day in day out. The future of search is personal, why would we be interested in anything else? @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Which is better for search engines, repeated phrases or different phrases with the same meaning?

    - by George Botros
    When I'm designing an ads website I have two options: Let the advertiser to choose from some predefined lists to create the new ad. For Example: product list ( T-Shirt, Shorts, Suit, .....) Color list ( Black, Red, .....) Let the advertiser to write his own descriptive content for the product For Example "Amazing suit with a good price" I like the first Scenario but which is better for search engine optimization [SEO], repeated phrases or different phrases with the same meaning? Note : assuming each page will contain one or more ads

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to tell a search engine not to index a specific section of an HTML page? [closed]

    - by Justin
    Possible Duplicate: Preventing robots from crawling specific part of a page I know you can use robots.txt to ignore entire pages or sections of your site, but is there a way to tell cralwers like the Googlebot to ignore specific sections of an HTML page? I found this blog post that discusses one method, but it appears only to work for the Google Search Appliance, not the Googlebot. Is there some method for at least Google for to do this?

    Read the article

  • Small Business Server 2008 - Microsoft Windows Search or Microsoft Search Server 2020 Express

    - by Christopher Edwards
    See Also - Small (Business) Server - Microsoft Windows Search or Microsoft Search Server 2008 Express Can anyone tell me if they have Search Server Express 2010 Beta working on Small Business Server 2010, or indeed if it is supported. The only reference I can find is here, but given how scant it is I'm not sure I should trust it:- http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/sharepoint2010setup/thread/12cf9846-b940-4441-9fc1-30016ea87e5c

    Read the article

  • Search for files after a relative date using Windows search

    - by Zoredache
    I am looking for a way to save a search that includes a relative date. Specifically I am looking for a way to save a search that matches files that have a modification date that is 7 days ago. I have read the Windows Search Advanced Query Syntax document and I am not seeing a way to say 7 days ago. The numbers and ranges section does mention that relative dates are possible. The problem is that the relative dates described there do not fit the criteria I need. The lastweek almost looks like what I want except if I run a query like after:lastweek on a Monday it will only show my file that have been modified since Sunday at 12:00. The lastweek/lastmonth seem to relative to the start of the week/month which is not what I need. Multi-word relative dates: week, next month, last week, past month, or coming year. The values can also be entered contracted, as follows: thisweek, nextmonth, lastweek, pastmonth, comingyear. One nice thing about saved searches is that they are stored as an XML document and the file format is documented. I am not seeing how to form a correct value for a datetime. If I was able to understand this format, I suspect I could use a text editor and created a saved search that does what I want. Fragment from the examples: <conditions> <condition type="leafCondition" valuetype="System.StructuredQueryType.DateTime" property="System.DateModified" operator="imp" value="R00UUUUUUUUZZXD-30NU" propertyType="wstr" /> </conditions> To summarize I am looking for an answer to one or both of these questions How do I make a query for '7 days ago' using the standard syntax? How is the DateTime stored in a saved search?

    Read the article

  • Adding arbitrary search URLs to Firefox search bar

    - by Matthew
    New-ish versions of Firefox (I'm currently on 3.6) have the nifty "search bookmark" feature, which allows you to create searches in the location bar with custom URLs, e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%s. This is really great, but when trying to mange the engines in the search bar, I was dismayed at the lack of customisability there. It looks like the two search methods are entirely distinct. Is there a way to put custom URLs in my search bar, or do I have to just hope that whatever I want is on the long but finite list of plugins at mycroft? Thanks UPDATE: done a bit more research, posting my own answer

    Read the article

  • In a binary search Tree

    - by user1044800
    In a binary search tree that takes a simple object.....when creating the getter and setter methods for the left, right, and parent. do I a do a null pointer? as in this=this or do I create the object in each method? Code bellow... This is my code: public void setParent(Person parent) { parent = new Person( parent.getName(), parent.getWeight()); //or is the parent supposed to be a null pointer ???? This is the code it came from: public void setParent(Node parent) { this.parent = parent; } Their code takes a node from the node class...my set parent is taking a person object from my person class.....

    Read the article

  • A particular url on a website suddenly disappeared from google search results - why?

    - by Ragavendran Ramesh
    I have a website which had a particular page url that was indexed in google search results - in the first 10 results. Suddenly it disappeared. Now that page is not even in the first 100 results. What would be the reason? I am feeling that the page has be spammed by our competitors. Is it possible to avoid that, or can I find if that page has been spammed or not? Is it possible to find the particular page in a website is spam or malicious?

    Read the article

  • How should I handle search engines auto-correcting the spelling of a site's name?

    - by Nathan G.
    A client's site and company is called 'Tranin Communications' (Tranin is her last name). It ranks well in searches for her name but rather poorly in searches for the name of her site/company. I realized that this is largely due to* search engines (Google especially) assuming that the query was misspelled and automatically including results for both 'train communications' and 'communications training'. Both of those queries yield many high-ranking sites that completely drown out hers. Sometimes Google even shows results for 'communications training' instead of 'tranin communications', hiding her site altogether. Is there a way to report an incorrect auto-correction to Google or something I can do to discourage this behavior (e.g. a meta tag)? My searches have come up cold, any suggestions would be appreciated. *I've come to this conclusion because her site ranks very highly when the same queries are put in quotes.

    Read the article

  • Use of another country domain name can influence search engines results?

    - by DontVoteMeDown
    I'm studing a way to create my company domain based on it's name. Consider that my company's name is Another Store and I want to register a domain like anothersto.re - this is just an example. That domain is strictly chosen by marketing. What happens is that my company is stabilished in Brazil and our domain here is .br. The .re domain stands for an island near France so haves nothing to do with my country. If that domain is chosen what it can imply about SEO questions? Did it will have any influence on search engines results considering that they look over user's region? This kind of domain use became common between modern companies - and marketing strategies - and that is why I'm considering it.

    Read the article

  • How can I search in transcluded categories?

    - by Wikis
    I want to add functionality to a MediaWiki wiki to search in specific categories: Platform 1 Platform 2 etc. So I created a template which, based on a certain field, assigns pages to those categories. The template was already included on most of these pages. So now most pages are in either: Category:Platform 1 or Category:Platform 2 Then I thought I just need to add incategory to the search and I'm done, as described on the Wikipedia page. But then I reread it and to my horror discovered: incategory: – using the incategory: parameter returns pages in a given category (as long as the pages are directly categorized, and not transcluded through templates). Eeeek! Is there any other way to search even in transcluded templates? Or any other way of resolving this?

    Read the article

  • Designing binary operations(AND, OR, NOT) in graphs DB's like neo4j

    - by Nicholas
    I'm trying to create a recipe website using a graph database, specifically neo4j using spring-data-neo4j, to try and see what can be done in Graph Databases. My model so far is: (Chef)-[HAS_INGREDIENT]->(Ingredient) (Chef)-[HAS_VALUE]->(Value) (Ingredient)-[HAS_INGREDIENT_VALUE]->(Value) (Recipe)-[REQUIRES_INGREDIENT]->(Ingredient) (Recipe)-[REQUIRES_VALUE]->(Value) I have this set up so I can do things like have the "chef" enter ingredients they have on hand, and suggest recipes, as well as suggest recipes that are close matches, but missing one ingredient. Some recipes can get complex, utilizing AND, OR, and NOT type logic, something like (Milk AND (Butter OR spread OR (vegetable oil OR olive oil))) and I'm wondering if it would be sane to model this in a graph using a tree type representation? An example of what I was thinking is to create three "node" types of AND, OR, and NOT and have each of them connect to the nodes value underneath. How else might this be represented in a Graph Database or is my example above a decent representation?

    Read the article

  • Is there a search engine that indexes source code of a web-page?

    - by Dexter
    I need to search the web for sites that are in our industry that use the same Adwords management company, to ensure that the said company is not violating our contract, as they have been accused of doing. They use a tracking code in the template of every page which has a certain domain in the URL, and I'm wondering if it's possible "Google" the source code using some bot that crawls the code rather than the content? For example, I bought an unlimited license for an image gallery, and I was asked to type the license number in a comment just before the script. I thought it was just so a human could look at the source and find out if someone paid, but it turned out that it was actually that they had a crawler looking for their source code and that comment. If it ran across the code on your site, it would look for the comment, and if it found one, it would check to see if it was an existing one. If not, it would first notify you of your noncompliance, and then notify the owner of the script. Edit: I'm looking to index HTML and JavaScript only, not the server-side languages or Java.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 search - sucky?

    - by Scott Evernden
    Is there an alternative to trying to remember all the advanced search options? Like an actual GUI as we had for windows XP? As powerful as Windows Search apparently is, I cannot possibly remember all the options available. How is a mere mortal like my Dad supposed to understand and retain all this? I get the shakes every time i need to find something on Win 7. Anyone have some relief?

    Read the article

  • How to search inside files in Windows 7?

    - by Revolter
    In Windows XP we can search for files witch contains a defined keyword (inside all files types) Windows 7 can look inside files for a keywords, okay, but only for text files. (*.doc,*.txt, *.inf, ...), not (*.conf, *.dat, *.*, ...) Microsoft search filters don't contain any filter I can use for this. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Google Custom Search Engine not giving the expected search result.

    - by iecut
    Hi, I have been trying to create a new google custom search engine, but when I try some query,the search engine it is not giving me the expected search result.On some queries it is working fine, but on other queries, it says"no result". I tried adding the URL of the website that I wanted to search for, but there are certain pages and keywords that are not coming up in the search result when I try to search for the keyword of that page. I tired adding both the main page URL and the URL of the sub page that I want to search for, but nothing is working. There are some sub pages to the main URL that are coming in the search result.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 search does not return results from indexed folders

    - by Dilbert
    I am experiencing this issue over and over again and I just cannot seem to find the answer. It doesn't make sense, but search simply does not return results from folders that certainly have these files inside. It's weird that this technology exists for more than 5 years now (it could be added to Windows XP as an addon), and they still haven't got it right. My folder contains 10 image files with .png extensions. Two scenarios: Scenario 1: I exclude the folder using Indexing options. Search works. Scenario 2: I turn on indexing for this folder. Search does not work. Of course, Agent Ransack returns results every time. When I check Advanced options for the Indexing options inside control panel, .png files are checked in the File Types tab, using the "File Properties filter". What's the deal with this? [Edit] To clarify, this doesn't happen with all folders, but does with more than one. For the "problematic" folders, even *.* doesn't return a single result. I found some advice to clear the archive and readonly attributes for all files (doesn't make sense, but hey), but it didn't work. Indexing status in Control panel is: Indexing complete. 100,000 items indexed. Folder is included in the list. File types list contains the .png extension (although it doesn't work with any filter, not even *.*).

    Read the article

  • C++ string array binary search

    - by Jose Vega
    string Haystack[] = { "Alabama", "Alaska", "American Samoa", "Arizona", "Arkansas", "California", "Colorado", "Connecticut", "Delaware", "District of Columbia", "Florida", "Georgia", "Guam", "Hawaii", "Idaho", "Illinois", "Indiana", "Iowa", "Kansas", "Kentucky", "Louisiana", "Maine", "Maryland", "Massachusetts", "Michigan", "Minnesota", "Mississippi", "Missouri", "Montana", "Nebraska", "Nevada", "New Hampshire", "New Jersey", "New Mexico", "New York", "North Carolina", "North Dakota", "Northern Mariana Islands", "Ohio", "Oklahoma", "Oregon", "Pennsylvania", "Puerto Rico", "Rhode Island", "South Carolina", "South Dakota", "Tennessee", "Texas", "US Virgin Islands", "Utah", "Vermont", "Virginia", "Washington", "West Virginia", "Wisconsin", "Wyoming"}; string Needle = "Virginia"; if(std::binary_search(Haystack, Haystack+56, Needle)) cout<<"Found"; If I also wanted to find the location of the needle in the string array, is there an "easy" way to find out?

    Read the article

  • findNode in binary search tree

    - by Weadadada Awda
    Does this look right? I mean I am trying to implement the delete function. Node* BST::findNode(int tofind) { Node* node = new Node; node = root; while (node != NULL) { if (node->val == tofind) { return node; } else if (tofind < node->val) { node = node->left; } else { node = node->right; } } } Here is the delete, it's not even close to done but, void BST::Delete(int todelete) { // bool found = false; Node* toDelete = new Node(); toDelete=findNode(todelete); if(toDelete->val!=NULL) { cout << toDelete->val << endl; } } This causes a segmentation fault just running that, any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Generate metadata of all files in a dir?

    - by nmuntz
    We are working on a project that is quite big, and its stored in an SVN repository under different folders with many files all over the place. Quite often, it is hard to locate the document that has a certain keyword or phrase. Does anyone know of any program that will generate and index the metadata of all the files that are in these documentation folders? (most filetypes are: xls, doc, ppt). Windows Search and Google Desktop could be an option but that would generally index the whole hard drive, emails, etc and thats probably much more than what we need and would not be suited for something more folder specific. Example of what im looking for: a program or webpage where i enter "John Doe" and it will show me all files in MyProjectFolder/ that contain the keyword "John Doe". This of course will already be indexed somewhere so searches should be almost instantaneous. Is there such a tool or i am asking too much? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • 404 code/header for search engines, on removed user content?

    - by mowgli
    I just got an email, from a former user on my website He was complaining that Google still shows the contact page he created on my site, even though he deleted it a month ago This is the first time in many years anyone requests this I told him, that it's almost entirely up to Google what content it wants to keep/show and for how long. If it's deleted on the site, I can't do much, other than request a re-visit from the googlebot The user-page already now says something like "Not found. The user has removed the content" TL;DR: But the question is: Should I generally add a 404 header (or other) for dynamic user content that has been removed from the site? Or could this hurt the site (SEO)?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >