Modern Web Woes - I'm mad at the internet

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
My work SAP has an app that requires qr code to login, making it obsolete if I'm not logged into a work pc already. Why even have an app if it requires me to go to a work computer and log in?

Another app requires 2 other apps (authenticator, passkey) just to log in. Nice!
 
I can't watch youtube videos today because no matter which IP I choose from the Proton VPN, I get the "Please sign in to confirm you're not a bot". This usually happens for one or two IPs but never so consistently.

Every time I try to make a YT/Google account it asks me for a phone confirmation. There used to be a time when you could still make a throwaway Google account, but I don't think this has been the case for a while.

I want to watch my YT slop anonimously goddamit.
 
Every time I try to make a YT/Google account it asks me for a phone confirmation. There used to be a time when you could still make a throwaway Google account, but I don't think this has been the case for a while.
There was a trick that involved using an ancient Android version on a virtual machine to create a goolag account without the need for a phone number, I don't know if it still works.
 
Sites that otherwise run fine on older browsers are being increasingly blocked by nonfunctional "bot checks" with no non-JS alternative, and by "blank referrer blocking" BS. What is it with the 'nets becoming an increasingly ass pile of bloated soy JavaShit bullshit, instead of the mostly plain HTML thing which just worked like back in the '00s?

I really do not like how one has to be constantly updating, updating, updating just to stay afloat on the Clown World (and India) honknet.
 
Sites that otherwise run fine on older browsers are being increasingly blocked by nonfunctional "bot checks" with no non-JS alternative, and by "blank referrer blocking" BS. What is it with the 'nets becoming an increasingly ass pile of bloated soy JavaShit bullshit, instead of the mostly plain HTML thing which just worked like back in the '00s?
Speaking of bot checkers I've been running into situations where I have to pass Cloudflare to access the site, and then pass a captcha to do something else. WHAT'S THE POINT?!
 
Speaking of bot checkers I've been running into situations where I have to pass Cloudflare to access the site, and then pass a captcha to do something else. WHAT'S THE POINT?!
modern internet.jpg
 
FFS! This internet just keeps getting worse and worse. Cannot find anything this, "send verification code" that, "sign in with Google" this, "your browser is outdated" that, "please disable your ad blocker" this, "Video unavailable Watch on YouTube" that, non-functional sites this, "Connection timed out" that! Endless, endless, endless BULLSHIT.
update:

"Error 153 Video player configuration error" and images being blocked or disabled because of "blank referrer blocking" BS, "checking you're not a bot" (will not work on just slightly older browsers), "Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue", "AI" "assistants" butting in everywhere... Within just 6 months later, the 'net has gotten much worse.
 
I use Odysee almost every day now. It's not out of principle to use alternative platforms as much as possible or even because there's some exclusive vein of hidden gems, but YouTube throttling my connection hard because I use tools like uBlock and yt-dlp. :lol:
 
update:

"Error 153 Video player configuration error" and images being blocked or disabled because of "blank referrer blocking" BS, "checking you're not a bot" (will not work on just slightly older browsers), "Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue", "AI" "assistants" butting in everywhere... Within just 6 months later, the 'net has gotten much worse.
Maybe if the enshittification continues, this Simpsons episode will come true.
 
Using "-ai" seems to make search results less accurate, while "-noai" seems to preserve whatever accuracy is left in search results.

Although from what I've seen, "-noai" only works on Google. At least "-ai" seems to still work on other sites.
This is a boolean operator for Google's search queries. I think that if you append a boolean operator to the search term it hides the LLM summary regardless of what the operator is.

They are trying to completely phase these out though. Most of the search query operators no longer work, and there are only a handful left that you can use on platforms like YouTube like before: yyyy

Code:
Advanced Search Operators
(Feb 8, 2024)
Daniel M. Russell
Shortcut:  bit.ly/AllTheOperators

Here, in one place, are all of the currently documented advanced search operators.  Note that some operators come in two versions of the same operator:  (e.g., allinanchor along with inanchor: ).  I’ve written about them together rather than having two entries for the same kind of operator.  (But, in truth, I almost never use the “allin…” form.) 

Note: In this document, I follow the square brackets convention, here a query is surrounded by square brackets.  So, when doing the query, you wouldn’t actually use the square brackets in your query.  (Although it won’t hurt anything either...)  Example: 
    
     [ codfish site:nytimes.com ]


_______________________________________________________________________

allinanchor:  /  inanchor:
    -- Google restricts results to pages containing all query terms in the anchor text on links to the page. For instance: [ allinanchor: best restaurant Sunnyvale ] will return only pages in which the anchor text on links to the pages contain the words “best” “restaurant” and “Sunnyvale” – that is, all of the words following the allinanchor operator.  So, when using allinanchor: in your query, do not include any other search operators.  By contrast, using the operator inanchor:  only searches for the term that’s next.    (This is true for all of the “all…” operators.)  Example:  [ inanchor:sales offer 2011 ]  will search only for “sales” in the anchor text.


Definition:  Anchor text is the text you see on a page that is linked to another web page
or a different place on the current page. For instance, this sample link has “sample link” as its anchor text. When you click on anchor text, you will be taken to the page or place on the page to which it is linked.

Example:  [ allinanchor: best restaurant La Jolla ocean view ] - search for those terms in the anchor

allintext: / intext:
  -- restricts results to those containing all the query terms you specify in the text of the page. For example, [ allintext: camping tent stove] will return only pages in which the words “camping” “tent” and “stove” appear in the text of the page.   Using the operator “intext: will search only for the next term in the text of the page.   .  (Note: using intext: in front of every word in your query is the same as using allintext: at the front of your query, e.g., [ intext:Victorian intext:artists ] is the same as [ allintext: Victorian artists ].)

Example:  [ allintext:mesothelioma asbestos symptoms ] - search for all those terms on the page

allintitle: / intitle:
    --  results to those containing all the query terms you specify in the title. For example,
[ allintitle: university relations ] will return only documents that contain the words “university” and “relations” in the title of the page.  Using the operator intitle: will search only for the next term in the title of the page.  For instance, [ flu shot intitle:help ] will return documents that mention the word “help” in their titles, and mention the words “flu” and “shot” anywhere in the document (title or not).


allinurl: / inurl:
    --  restricts results to those containing all the query terms you specify in the URL. For example, [ allinurl:google faq ] will return only documents that contain the words “google” and “faq” in the URL, such as “www.google.com/help/faq.html”.


term1  AROUND  n  term2
    --  limits results to those documents where term1 appears within a certain number of words of term2.  For instance,

      [ search AROUND 3 engine ]

will find only documents that have the words “search” within 3 words of “engine” – this is particularly useful when searching for common words that are relevant to your search only when in close proximity. (For instance, useful for finding two names in close quarters:  [ “Politician Surname” AROUND 5 “Major Donor” ] )  Note that this doesn’t preserve order: it will find “engine search” and “search engine” 

before:

    -- lets you find results that were published before a given date.  Example:

    [ avengers endgame before:2018-1-1 ]

where the date is YYYY-MM-DD - note that if you only specify the year, it will default to the first of that year.  And likewise…

after:

    -- lets you find results that were published after a given date.  Example:

    [ avengers endgame after:2020-1-1 ]

where the date is YYYY-MM-DD - note that if you only specify the year, it will default to the first of the next year.  That is, [ avengers after:2020 ] will show results after Jan 1, 2021.   

define
    -- gives definitions from pages on the web for the term that follows. Useful  for finding definitions of words, phrases, and acronyms. For example, [ define peruse ] will  give a definition of the word “peruse.”  This also works for many phrases,   (Note:  This operator used to be “define:” -- we got rid of the colon a while ago.) 

     [ define Hobson’s choice ]

Of course, if you just search for a rare word (for example, [ surfeit ]) you’ll get the definition as the first search result. 

filetype:suffix
  -- limits results to pages whose names end in suffix.  The suffix is anything following the last period in the file name of the web page and can be many characters in length.


Example:  [ search engine guidelines filetype:pdf ] will return Adobe Acrobat pdf files that match the terms “search,” “engine,” “guidelines,” and are  pages whose names end with pdf.  Note that the filetype: operator works with any string after the last period, thus this works:  [filetype:1234567] Not useful too often, unless you know the final string of a document. 

     [ filetype:pptx superconductor lesson plan ]

Interesting note:  You can’t find MP3 files this way any longer.  It used to work, but then copyright issues started raising their heads.  The closest you can get to this now is to search the URL like this:  [ inurl:mp3 ]

Update (July, 2023):  Google has also deindexed CSV files, so [filetype:CSV] doesn’t work any more.  On the other hand, if you’re looking for data, consider looking at Google Data Set Search, which specializes in exactly that kind of search. 


Fill in the blanks (* - the “star operator”)
    -- the *, or wildcard, is a little-known feature that can be quite useful. If you include * within a query, it tells Google to try to treat the star as a placeholder for any unknown term(s) and then find the best matches, up to 5 terms in length. For

Example: [ Google * ] will give you results about many of Google's products (go to next page and next page -- we have many products). The query [ Obama voted * on the * bill ] will give you stories about different votes on different bills. Note that the * operator works only on whole words, not parts of words.  (See one of the Search Idioms below for an advanced use of * in a quoted query, such as [ “Google * products” ] .)

inanchor:   (see allinanchor: above )

intext: (see allintext: above)

intitle: ( see allintitle: above)

inurl: (see allinurl: above)

Minus sign  ( – ) to exclude
    -- placing  a minus sign immediately before a word indicates that you do not want pages that contain this word to appear in your results. The minus sign should appear immediately before the word and should be preceded with a space. For example, in the query [ anti-virus software ], the minus sign is used as a hyphen and will not be interpreted as an exclusion symbol; whereas the query:  [ anti-virus –software ] will search for the words 'anti-virus' but exclude references to software. You can exclude as many words as you want by using the – sign in front of all of them, for example [ jaguar –cars –football –os ]. The – sign can be used to exclude more than just words. For example, place a minus sign before the 'site:' operator (without a space) to exclude a specific site from your search results.

Number range ( .. )
 --  The number range operator searches for results containing numbers in a given range. Just add two numbers, separated by two periods, with no spaces, into the search box along with your search terms. Example: [  Willie Mays 1950..1960 ]   You can also specify a unit of measurement or some other indicator of what the number range represents.  For example, here's how you'd search for a DVD player that costs between $50 and $100:
    
     [ DVD player $50..$100 ]

OR
    -- the Boolean operator OR specifies alternatives to use as synonyms in search.  For instance, the query:

       [ mesothelioma OR “lung disease”  treatment ]

could be used to search for a treatment for either mesothelioma or the quoted phrase “lung disease” (Be sure to make the OR all uppercase.  Lowercase or doesn’t work.)  Note that OR works inside of a quoted phrase.  That is, a query like  [ “jackfruit OR papaya” ] is not a phrase search… it’s the same as [ jackfruit OR papaya ]   


Phrase search (using double quotes, “…” )
  -- by putting double quotes around a set of words, you are telling Google to consider the exact words in that exact order without any change. Google already uses the order and the fact that the words are together as a very strong signal and will stray from it only for a good reason, so quotes are usually unnecessary. By insisting on phrase search you might be missing good results accidentally. For example, a search for [ "Alexander Bell" ] (with quotes) will miss any pages that refer to Alexander G. Bell.

Try this to see how it works:
     [ “Alexander * Bell” ] 
    -- this will give you results like “Alexander Graham Bell” and “Alexander G. Bell” and
       “Alexander le Bell” 



Search exactly as is (double quotes around a single word) - aka ‘phrase search’
    -- Google employs synonyms automatically, so that it finds pages that mention, for example, childcare for the query [ child care ] (with a space), or California history for the query [ ca history ]. But sometimes Google helps out a little too much and gives you a synonym when you don't really want it. By attaching double quotes around a word as in the query

     [ “ca” history ]

you are telling Google to match that word precisely as you typed it.  Note that you can put double quotes inside of double quotes, as in:

     [ "words that are "mispelled" by" ]
 
this query searches for the phrase “words that are mispelled by” -- but the term “mispelled” is intentionally misspelled.  (Get it?)


site:
    -- using the site: operator restricts your search results to the site or domain you specify. For example, [ penquins site:.aq ] will search for pages about penguins from web sites that have an AQ top-level domain name.  (AQ is Antarctica, and is mostly research stations located there.) A query like  [ accidents site:bls.gov ] will find pages about accidents within the bls.gov domain (BLS = Bureau of Labor Statistics).  You can specify a domain with or without a period, e.g., either as .gov or gov.

related:
    -- a search for  related:URL lists pages that are similar to the web page you specify. For instance, [ related:en.wikipedia.org] will list web pages that are similar to the Wikipedia homepage.  (Deprecated: June, 2023)

Combinations of operators:
    -- many of the search operators  –, OR, and " " can be combined.  For example, to find articles on security from all sites except Wikipedia.org you would search for:   
[  article security –site:Wikipedia.org  ]  Similarly, you might want to exclude some kinds of documents with a search such as [ salsa recipe -tomatoes -filetype:pdf ] which would find salsa recipes that do not include the term “tomatoes” and are not PDF files. 

More advanced search options: 
    -- Note that the Advanced Search page (http://www.google.com/advanced_search) also provides a set of search options that are not available as special operators.  Using the Advanced Search page you can also:

               - filter by language (e.g., find pages only in Spanish, Chinese, German, etc.)
               - date (filter by time)
               - usage rights (filter by Creative Commons license)
               - reading level (find pages that are Basic, Intermediate or Advanced reading levels)



Handy search idioms: 
    -- a “search idiom” is a particular way of doing a search that’s sometimes really handy.  Idiom 1:  Site minus site.  A search like:  [ site:nyc.gov -site:www.nyc.gov ] will give you sites in NYC.gov that do NOT begin with WWW.  That’s handy for finding subdomains within a particular site, which can you then use site: to search. 

Idiom 2:  Stars in quoted phrase.  A query like [ whenever * says * whenever ] looks for words in roughly that sequence.  But if you really want words in that order (and this is what I usually do), you want to use the stars within a quoted phrase. 

Example:  [  “whenever * says * whenever” ] is a very different query.  Look at them side-by-side.  The one on the right is a much better query, for my money. 




Idiom 3:  Stars in site search.

A search like [ site:*.law.*.edu ] will find all of the .EDU sites with “.law” in the domain name.   

Also try:  [ site:*.nyc.gov ] will match all of the NYC.gov sites with a subdomain. 

Also:  [ site:*.nasa.*  inurl:education ] gives lots of good clues about education sites at NASA.

Generally, a * matches any token (that is, an entire term without spaces).  A token would be something like:  www  nasa   gov   schools  spartan-resume 

So you can always replace a token in a URL by a *, and it will match ANY token that can/would fit into that position. 

But, oddly enough, * also matches prefix strings before tokens.. except for the TLD (the last term in a URL). 

Thus, queries like this will work:
     [ site:www.*creative.com ] -- will match sites like
www.av-creative.com
www.aquila-creative.com 

  While queries like:
     [ site:www.*creative.* ] -- will also work to show sites like
    www.dei-creative.biz
    www.afr-creative.com
 

Oddly, the * doesn’t seem to match anything in the post position (e.g., [ site:foo*.com ] ).  I can imagine why that’s true (it’s easier to match if it’s prefix *).


NOTES:   

If you’ve read this far, you’re a true Search Nerd.  Nicely done. 

Special characters:  Not long ago, only a few very special characters were searchable.  These days, almost all of them are searchable!  You can now search for ∞   Note that a few symbols: $ %  # are special-special and can be searched for as part of a term (e.g.,   #cute or $50 or 24%).  See “Number Range” above. 

Another special-special character is : (colon).  You CAN search for things that look like this: 
[ 10:27 ] (useful mostly for Bible verses). 

But generally speaking, you can now search for extended characters. 
Examples: 
     [ I ❤  NY ]
     [ 🍺 pub ]  or, the logical extension of this:   [ 🍺 nagano site:.jp ]
     [ size  7½ ] 

(But note that the ½ character will be synonymized to 0.5 as well, so you might find 7.5 as well as 7½ -- if you don’t want the synonyms, use Verbatim mode OR the double quote operator). 

A special-special character is + -- you can now search for special terms that we have with a plus character in it in the last position.  Examples:

      [ G+ ]
      [ C++ ]
      [ Coke+ ]
      [ timer+ ]
      [ 40+ ]   -- and other numbers (20+,30+, 55+, etc.) 


Parentheses don’t matter:  I know lots of people want to be able to do something like this:

     [ (A B ) OR (C D) ]

but Google doesn’t see the parens, and that gets turned into:

    [ A B OR C D ]

which means just A, (B OR C), and D.  If you want to get [ A B ] OR [ C D ] you’ll have to do 2 separate searches and combine the results yourself, which is probably what you really want to do.  Why doesn’t Google support this?  Because we’ve found that most people get it wrong. That is, when they use parens, they end up with a search that is much worse than if Google ignores the parens.  (I’ve seen this in my own field studies, even among information professionals--people mess up the parens a LOT.) 

Word order:  Yes, word order matters in a search.  Consider the difference between the searches:  [ to be or not to be ] vs. [ be to not or be to ]  -- the results are VERY different.




-----
Deprecated:

Link:  (taken out of service mid-2016) 
    -- link:URL shows pages that point to that URL.
    -- For example, to find pages that point to Google’s 3DWarehouse home page you used to  search for…
                      [ link: http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/ ]


    But it was getting really abused, so Google had to remove it from general use. 


Info:  removed in mid-2017


Plus (+) operator: And you’re probably wondering what happened to the + operator.  Well, here’s the story. 

It USED TO MEAN the same as Verbatim (i.e., do not spell correct, and use no synonyms).  Then, during the age of Google-+ (G+) it used to be a flag for “Search G+ for mentions of this term.”  But that interpretation is long gone. 


Synonym (~) tilde operator: This used to let searchers ask for “and all the synonyms” of a term.  (example:  [ ~mesothelioma ] would search for mesothelioma and all of its synonyms.  That was removed because synonyms is always turned on these days.  It would just be redundant.


Filetype:CSV   Filetype:MP3 These filetype operators used to return useful results.  They no longer do so.  Try using Google Data Set Search instead.
 
Most of the search query operators no longer work
Twitter is a good example of this, in recent times a fair number of their search operators have returned literal nonsense on input, just yesterday actually I recall this still being an issue. Most notably with sorting by min_faves(likes) and min_retweets, you only get approximate results, I guess because providing precise search results for basic queries is just too hard nowadays.
 
Everybody knows Wikipedia is a bad source. But, have you ever tried looking at the citations they give for their articles? I've found websites written in foreign languages on English Wikipedia which did not come with a translation. After translating them with Google Translate, they seemed to be completely unrelated to the information on in the Wikipedia article. Another issue is that supposed citations use now dead links. Some people will argue that this is a naturally expected part of the Tragedy of the Commons. This doesn’t matter. How do you know that what Wikipedia says was ever at least published in some rag, if the citations are often bogus? It's not just the issue of finding an archive for an old link, often the links aren't even really related. This is not true for all articles. The special popular articles with important narratives to keep in check, they are impossible to change and will always walk lock step with official narratives. It's down to public visibility that normies believe that Wikipedia has real citations. Most people only look at the site for getting quick facts about events, and since those articles walk lock step with the official narrative, so most people never notice this. If all the citations were actually analysed, I would predict that most of them are dead links or are dubious.

It is a complete illusion that Wikipedia has citations. Imagine Wikipedia without all the citations and without the concept that any of the information is cited. It would be exactly the same as it now, only the pretence that some of the information is trustworthy because it's just coming from other sources and being reported, so it's the responsibility those sources for whether the claims are true are or not, would be broken. The news prints whatever fiction about an event that serves their political bias. This has been true since the inception of print news media over a century ago. The actual citations have very little value. Wikipedia is basically not cited. You could fit all the people who read the citations on Wikipedia into a thimble, the number is so small. If you do look at them they are useless on top of that, so you're just looking for known deadends. The point of the citations it to maintain the illusion of being a Public Commons Encyclopaedia in the minds of normies. It has no value other than that. It’s almost like word art styling in a web theme or Lorem Ipsome. The citations are more of a visual design element than actually a functional element, used only to psychologically condition naive readers to Wikipedia’s ends.
 
Everybody knows Wikipedia is a bad source. But, have you ever tried looking at the citations they give for their articles? I've found websites written in foreign languages on English Wikipedia which did not come with a translation. After translating them with Google Translate, they seemed to be completely unrelated to the information on in the Wikipedia article. Another issue is that supposed citations use now dead links. Some people will argue that this is a naturally expected part of the Tragedy of the Commons. This doesn’t matter. How do you know that what Wikipedia says was ever at least published in some rag, if the citations are often bogus? It's not just the issue of finding an archive for an old link, often the links aren't even really related. This is not true for all articles. The special popular articles with important narratives to keep in check, they are impossible to change and will always walk lock step with official narratives. It's down to public visibility that normies believe that Wikipedia has real citations. Most people only look at the site for getting quick facts about events, and since those articles walk lock step with the official narrative, so most people never notice this. If all the citations were actually analysed, I would predict that most of them are dead links or are dubious.
When I read something on Wikipedia I know is wrong, I'll follow the citation and it's often referencing a throwaway line in the source article that has nothing to do with the thesis of the source article. For example, let's pretend there is a Wikipedia article that says something like, "Most people don't trust mechanics." The source will often be something like an academic paper about something like the Right to Repair and people's reluctance to fix their own devices. There'll be a sentence in the source that says something like, "Even though many people don't trust mechanics, they are still reluctant to fix their own cars." Only the fact that people are reluctant to fix their own cars will be cited by the source itself, not the the fact that people don't trust mechanics. So the thing Wikipedia appears to be citing is just some throwaway clause the author of the paper added to spruce up their prose. I've seen it enough at this point that it's definitely a pattern.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom