Move over, Google. Here’s Wikipedia's search engine – full of on-demand smut

I'm not sure about the viability

The concept of "porn that anyone can contribute to" already exists on the Internet.

Or so I'm told.

porn...

don't ever fall down the rabbit hole and look up the word "ejaculation" on Wikipedia. Really, a definition is quite enough, maybe a medical-type drawing of the affected parts. But we don't need media about it...including a video. Although...at least the current video shows a guy using his hand...

"Debbie Does Dallas"

What is it about that video (film?) that appears to make it timeless. It is a milestone in my educational media consumption together with the obligatory playground black & white "Health and Efficiency" - and later on "Mayfair".

The video was on the shelves of our high street rental store when they were springing up like mushrooms. Before Blockbuster - or the BBFC ratings were applied. We had to rent videos - a VHS M*A*S*H cost GBP49 to buy (Today's prices GBP150??)

A different user experience to searching

Google isn't going away any time soon but here's an interesting concept: if you do a Google search for - as one example - a country or place, one of the first results is almost always a Wikipedia entry. This applies to many things not just places. Many people are getting in the mindset that if they want to get this info they can just go straight to Wikipedia since that's where they'll end up. And they like that because it presents the information in the same consistent format.

This is opposed to Googling something and going to any number of random, differently presented websites, and then having to look for the info you want - because of the UX/design.

Wikipedia lets you do a search and the actual information (not the search result itself) is presented consistently. Google can't offer that because they are of course presenting the search results consistently, but not the pages where users end up.

This seems to be a different way of thinking about it, which is interesting.

A fascinating strategic option

"Instead of finding Wikipedia through Google, you could bypass Google completely."

Perhaps with something like a "Bookmark" or a "Favorite". Now bear with me, this is still only a concept, but I hope to have a working example very soon.

I've applied for several grants, and when fully funded, I plan to conduct some spirited research at one of the local watering holes.

Wow thanks for the tip, I hadn't any idea and embedded movies you say?

I noticed that the article didn't once use terms like wikifiddler etc.

Since I meant that as a compliment, I'm a bit surprised a post stating that fact (and nothing else) just got rejected.

Wikipedia is But Stage One

If Wikipedia can somehow evolve minus ad content, this indispensable tool for the terminally curious might have a chance at upstaging Google. I have often spent entire days entertaining myself leapfrogging through Wikipedia on safari for anything of interest that fills in gaps in my knowledge base. Prescient Wikipedia staff have probably already sussed that their content can be organized into pedagogical units and may one day supplant the idiocy that passes for public school education in brick and mortar institutions. Of course now there will be edit wars over which videos best illustrate the point in question. Frankly, I think that maps, diagrams and schematics would be easier to scan than videos for those who need more rapid uptake of salient data or meta data.

Why reinvent the wheel?

There is a working, privacy caring, open source thing which everyone seems to love: DuckDuckGo .

It also made into browsers. Support it with that brain power and money instead.

Better stick with Google. There's certainly no porn that will be found using it!

Search engines..

I have not used google to search for anything for a long time. I know that they are reliant on ads but to me that is no good, If I look for details on, say, thermal properties of titanium, they would fill the first page with pointless shit that said ''buy thermal properties for titanium locally for less here..'' and similar crap.

I would happily pay for a search utility, be it google, duckduckgo, wiki etc if it did away with this sort of shit and gave me relevant search results as opposed to search results that are relevant only to the people paying to push their shit. most of my need for information such as this is based on my work and is worth money to me.

Sadly, I don;t think that will ever happen as the number of people willing to pay for a better service are dwarfed by the ones that want everything for free an are to fucking stupid to realise that they are the product being sold.

Bad a s Google is it doesn't toss up porn when you image search for furniture or pearl. And WP is innoculated against ever stopping that from happening.