I am interested in your idea but based on your description, I am legitimately uncertain as to how it is measurably different from what Google already does.
I am certainly not saying that Google is and always will be the best.
Currently Google does not give you all the available pictures of an object, from a photo you have.
This “horizontal” knowledge isn’t present in Google’s databases.
Additionally, page ranking, whichever it is currently, does not permit you to sort the answers by yourself. You may want that. Or implement a function like “the shortest”. And many more complex functions.
Sites are just one type of object. You can’t Google for most other objects.
There are some cameras in Africa, showing you water ponds. I want to know, if there is a waterhole, where a lion came into the picture less than 100 seconds ago. Or a warthog. Or both.
And so on.
Above mentioned GLT would give you such answers, Google doesn’t.
shrug
I am interested in your idea but based on your description, I am legitimately uncertain as to how it is measurably different from what Google already does.
I am certainly not saying that Google is and always will be the best.
Currently Google does not give you all the available pictures of an object, from a photo you have.
This “horizontal” knowledge isn’t present in Google’s databases.
Additionally, page ranking, whichever it is currently, does not permit you to sort the answers by yourself. You may want that. Or implement a function like “the shortest”. And many more complex functions.
Sites are just one type of object. You can’t Google for most other objects.
There are some cameras in Africa, showing you water ponds. I want to know, if there is a waterhole, where a lion came into the picture less than 100 seconds ago. Or a warthog. Or both.
And so on.
Above mentioned GLT would give you such answers, Google doesn’t.