Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Not the Happy Cuddle Club.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                           

Froogle

Frugal + Google = Froogle
  (+7, -1)
(+7, -1)
  [vote for,
against]

I am finding it increasingly more difficult to find relevant information on any given topic using search engines on the net without having to wade through an ever growing number of hits that require purchase for said information.

I would like to propose that a law to be enacted so that any and all hits for an internet search, which would ultimately result in a monetary transaction to acquire said information, to be required to have prices listed in the original search blurb... before wasting time filling out forms.

I mean really now... who do I bill for this wasted time?

These sites would rapidly see their advertising revenue dwindle and clue into the fact the they are part of the problem.


Goodbye Froogle, Hello Google Product Search! http://searchengine...roduct-search-11001
er… [Ian Tindale, May 20 2015]

[link]






       + I'll vote to pass that law.
xandram, May 21 2015
  

       Seconded.
blissmiss, May 21 2015
  

       And for porn! What gives? Everyone trying to make a buck on the internet. The tragedy of the commons, or something.   

       Oh - probably you were talking about porn in the first place. I am slow that way. Buns!
bungston, May 21 2015
  

       Well I'll be dipped. There's already a Froogle... and it's like the exact opposite of what I had in mind.   

       How about:   

       The search results are shown like usual, except for icons in the left margin. If it has a "lock" icon, that means that the info requires user-login to see the full content. If it has a "$" next to it, it requires paying before seeing full content.   

       This doesn't need to be a law. It's just a feature that any search engine could implement & profit from, & then others would add it too.
sophocles, May 21 2015
  

       Sounds good to me. Time is limited so anything that lets more info be processed with the least amount of digging the better.   

       Or in 2 fries case...dipping.
blissmiss, May 23 2015
  

       Doogle. Returns ay resalts en Scots, dinya noo.
MaxwellBuchanan, May 23 2015
  

       No law needed, the free market can take care of it, if it is in fact a problem. I'm against it on freedom of speech grounds and for complaining how a free product doesn't work the way you want.
tatterdemalion, May 23 2015
  

       I don't know that it fringes anywhere on freedom of speech. I just want to see that there is a price-tag attached to clicking on any given site, and if a site is claiming to contain free content... then that content should be free or false advertising claims should apply without the need for complaint.   

       I've about had my fill of con-men/women and I figure that some integrity might make for a nice light dessert.   

       That gets to the question of whether search engine results could be considered advertising. Yes, Google and others display sponsored results and obviously those are advertising but I don't know if this is what you are talking about. If it is, then the answer is , avoid those. If it isn't, then what I said before.
tatterdemalion, May 23 2015
  

       Sophocles is right and an honourable man.
4and20, May 24 2015
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle