
The invention machine - rglovejoy
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13761953
======
madair
The opening presumption, that people are only interested in the answer, is
IMHO wrong. But that's just a gut feeling, I can't prove it. But here's my
thinking anyway:

(1) It's a presumption that people are only interested in the destination.
Perhaps people think they are only interested in the destination, but the
reality is, we do often enjoy the journey too. And maybe the journey is
important even when we don't enjoy it. Sure, sometimes it really is the answer
we want, like when we ask Google what's "17 meters in feet", but I think
that's only in some cases.

(2) Getting only an answer, or even a range of possible answers within a set
of possible meanings to the question, is like saying there's only black and
white, or at least, very few shades of gray. The glut of potential "answers"
we get back from a Google search is a feature, not a bug, when we consider
that nothing really is black or white when it comes down to it. Is an engine
that's apparently so "smart" just predisposed to more systemic bias?

(3) And why do we presume that it's a question we're asking in the first
place. I think we're often really embarking on a journey when we search, and
purposefully so, without a specific destination planned.

I know I'm simplifying down the point of the article, but I just wanted to say
this because I've been seeing a fair bit of this holy grail of answers talk
lately, and I think it's a bit one-side and simplistic.

