"Hey, can I borrow a piece of paper?"
"Sure, just grab a page out of my teenage daughter's journal that she's not using. Flip through until you find one"
Here's an idea, privacy first, ooooh anit we cool coders second. Privacy very much has to be the default, not google's cleverness or revenue stream.
All I can say is thank the non existent one that I don't use gmail for anything even vaguely important.
The only reason you don't have the same reaction to the location bar in your browser showing browser history is that you're used to it.
If you don't want email results to show up on your search page, just don't turn it on.
If that is true, why would you expect every site to assume you want privacy, when you chose to have customization by being logged in?
If you're using multilogin, you're sending cookies for multiple sessions on each request. How can you blame the server for thinking you might want results for both?
Them: "Hey dude, can I use your computer real quick for a second."
You: "Err, hold on a second, I need to do something..."
Them: awkward silence
But more seriously it really depends on what appears in that search results and for which queries. If it's done properly it only triggers when there's a very relevant mail matching the query, which would be unlikely from just a casual search from a friend.
Also if just the title is shown, it doesn't reveal much.
I liked it better when the web was impersonal, when you actually had to make an effort to filter out the information you didn't want. As more and more of the top of your search results get cluttered with things that Big Bro knows that you want, the less and less you are exposed to the world of things that you never knew you might take an interest in.
Search used to be a way to find marvelous new gems in the ocean of Internet. Now it's just a reaffirmation of your favorite repertoires, leaving you with the ultimate confirmation bias in everything you read, buy, and think about. These days, I can rarely find anything with Google that I didn't already know about, read about, write about, etc. Half the time, I use Google as a bookmark manager ... heck, I might as well just search my browser history. Throwing email history into the mix will only accelerate this trend, shoving each of us even deeper into our own little holes in the ground. Search has become boring, an incubator for egocentric brats, and a place where political diversity goes to die ... all in the name of personalization, i.e. ad revenue.
Nowadays, the only sites that dare to give me non-personalized information seem to be DuckDuckGo and Wikipedia. Oh, and occasionally Google, when I'm logged out and freshly rid of cookies.
> Nowadays, the only sites that dare to give me
> non-personalized information seem to be DuckDuckGo and
> Wikipedia. Oh, and occasionally Google, when I'm logged
> out and freshly rid of cookies.
If you really don't want Google to return personalized results, then click the "Hide personal results" icon in the top right. This is less annoying than having to clear all your cookies.
Google in recent times has gotten so creepy that I never stay logged in. Same with Facebook btw.
What's interesting is that while Google is narrowing down on what you are specifically looking for in search, it is simultaneously introducing a product that is designed to suggest things you have not explicitly asked for: Google Now. It will be interesting to see if they can provide the discovery functionality that you want with a product that is specifically designed to perform that function, rather than one that does so unintentionally.
I'm also not sure whether something like Google Now could fill the role of completely unpersonalized, "objective" information. It is still personalized in the sense that the algorithm is tainted by my current preferences, so it might confirm my biases in more subtle ways. In fact, Google has every incentive to show me results that please my palate as much as possible. "Worried about Obamacare? Why don't you check out this fundamentalist's blog?"
Google already has the content it needs to do that and does not have to tell you that it's using it.
Speaking anecdotally of course, I've found the gmail search function to be very good. Add in operators as you would in regular searches and it's as useful as regular search--but in the context of email.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding?
The most recent example dealt with a specific admin type email i needed for forms. it is an email with two fairly distinctive words. As far as i know, it's the only email i've ever received with those two words.
The top 20 emails returned by search don't contain both words.
perhaps this is a weird or unfair use case. There's a fair amount of institutional knowledge tucked away in that account. Often, i need complicated constraints to coerce the search to bring forth my data.
Don't know if it'd help (and not to suggest you didn't try), but sometimes quotes can help on that front. Also, can't speak to the apps version--haven't used it myself.
Thanks for the reply.
I still wish they did page numbers for search results or something like that. (I'm aware of the manually editing the url hack, but it's not the same experience.)