

Ask HN: Would we be better off if web search was a public service? - MrSomething

If we view the World Wide Web as a giant information system, perhaps the largest information system ever created by humanity, then we should view Google Search as an incredibly important tool for locating relevant information stored in this global brain.<p>If we view it this way, why are we not disgusted that individuals and companies can pay money for increased visibility in such a system via the AdWords platform? Why should we allow money to explicitly influence the information presented to us via Google Search? Would we allow libraries to show sponsored content when searching for books?<p>Of course, AdWords is Google&#x27;s primary source of revenue, so we cannot separate this issue from the question of how Google could continue to survive as a pure search platform. Here&#x27;s where I think we&#x27;ve been looking at this backwards.<p>We see search as just another business. I would argue that the technology to search the World Wide Web is, in essence, <i>vital information infrastructure</i> and a <i>public service</i>, and should not be subject to commercial influence; the only viable alternative I can see is funding the operation of Web search via taxpayer money, much like we fund the construction of roads, the operation of libraries, and so on.<p>I believe our current paradigm, that all web services are private businesses that must be monetized somehow, results from the inability of humanity to properly comprehend the massive importance of the network that we have created; we have neglected to consider the importance of public services within the context of the web. I believe that searching the web is one of the most fundamental technological public services that exists, and should be free of financial influence.
======
michaelpinto
If you're looking for a good reason why that wouldn't work I think you might
want to look at the rise and fall of DMOZ which is known as The Open Directory
Project. The problem with such an idea (which could be solved but is
challenging) is that the web evolves quickly, and it takes funding to keep up
with that. It also takes people to do that work, and while you can crowdsource
some things with ease I think hardcore search engine really takes some
specialization.

That said it's amazing to me how much of the web and internet is open. If you
think about it something like Wikipedia is very useful and not owned by a
corporation. If if you think about it that's sort of amazing when you look at
the history of technology.

------
mooism2
You are in the USA, so asking whether the US government should run a web
search engine?

I have visions of a search engine that only indexes US websites, doesn't
return links to abortion providers or gun shops, and only supports English-
language queries (Spanish coming soon, unless their budget gets cut).

------
feklee
Think about it: How is forcing people to pay for web search good?

Google, Bing, etc. are the peaceful alternative.

~~~
MrSomething
Couldn't you say the same for police / fire departments / roads, etc? If
everyone uses it, and everyone deserves access to it, maybe it should be
publicly funded?

------
skaevola
I'm sure the NSA would be thrilled if web service was run by the government.

~~~
MrSomething
Do you consider PBS to be run by the government? I'm talking about subsidies,
not explicit control.

EDIT: Okay so apparently PBS only receives 15% of its funding from the
government. I'll have to reconsider this solution.

It still feels like global information systems should be immune from this kind
of "pay-for-eyeballs" influence. In a perfect world, perhaps.

Also: libraries are funded by taxpayer money, but do we consider that a bad
thing?

