Some of this is just because some of these frameworks and technologies have been around for a while and they iterate frequently. I see a ton of Azure content that is obsolete after only a few years.

[–] johny_joe_1975@discuss.online 2 points 6 months ago

So many SEO trick to put yourselves into top google search for traffic.

I have google for bug and stuff, and most common bug can be found on shitty content Java tip page with broken format, lot of ads, and sometime untrue/outdate information.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I've started relying more on AI-powered tools like Perplexity for many of my search use-cases for this very fact - all results basically warrant a pre-filtering to be useful.

[–] red@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

This is one solution to the issue, and it seems silly you are being downvoted for it.

Google became what it became, and years of seo optimisation cat & mouse play has reached new heights. Those obviously target Google instead of their competitors for now.

Would that we could have perfect search results, it would be beneficial to google as well.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago

I think it might have to do with the broad anti-AI sentiment that seems to be present here at Lemmy.

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 6 months ago

Postgres is a weird one. The first link probably answers the query, just click the latest version (or your version) once you are there.

The problem is probably so many systems run old versions, so the results skew.

[–] JoYo@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago

worst bt ever

[–] tiredofsametab@kbin.run 1 points 6 months ago

You didn't include a version in your query. You also could try using quotes, though this specific entry may not be helped by it (e.g. "in operator"). For most things, you can click a link with the older version and somewhere there is typically a dropdown or something to change the version and, if not, you'll at least know which section/etc. it is in in the new documentation.

If you don't include a version, it's probably going to pull up questions/answers that it finds most match in general and maybe people just aren't asking that question for your version.

I think there's a lot to hate about modern search results, but I also think there's some opportunity to search better. I do miss the days when AND, OR, and NOT operators actually worked all the time and as expected.

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Skill issue. Old version docs tend to offer you a redirect to more recent docs, and even then something sintactic like an "IN" operator is unlikely to change in form or structure between versions of a database engine.

[–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You realize It's just an example right?

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Course I do. Why, do you need a link to the newest version of the joke?

[–] kattenluik@feddit.nl 2 points 6 months ago

Ohh I get it, it's so hilarious that no one knew it was a joke!

I guess you can always laugh at it yourself.

[–] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Old version docs tend to offer you a redirect to more recent docs

Sadly, the docs, I've worked with (openstack and ansible) frequently, don't do this. They have a button to go to the latest version of the docs, but not to the equivalent page on the latest version. This means I have to find the equivalent page again, from the integrated search usually.

And yes, a lot can change between versions. New features can get added that solve your problems or older stuff can get removed.

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 1 points 6 months ago

They have a button to go to the latest version of the docs, but not to the equivalent page on the latest version

Oh yeah this is a PITA. Tho in that case it's skill issue on their end.

load more comments