(no subject)

[morwen]

This makes an interesting curve! I wonder why we have the spikes.


1 ha - 172,000,000
2 haha - 6,290,000
3 hahaha - 2,950,000
4 hahahaha - 1,140,000
5 hahahahaha - 523,000
6 hahahahahaha - 262,000
7 hahahahahahaha - 144,000
8 hahahahahahahaha - 86,100
9 hahahahahahahahaha - 50,400
10 hahahahahahahahahaha - 36,500
11 hahahahahahahahahahaha - 22,300
12 hahahahahahahahahahahaha - 15,700
13 hahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 11,800
14 hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 9,350
15 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 9,040
16 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 7,240
17 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 4,510
18 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 3,970
19 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 791
20 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 937
21 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 658
22 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 4,390
22 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 4,080
23 hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - 3,640


i am bored. can you tell?

Comments

[evan.livejournal.com]

The counts are just plain not accurate, and it's that way for very good technical reasons and not simply laziness. Different search engines estimate the total counts in different ways, and while plenty of conspiracy theorists say they lie to make themselves seem more impressive, I don't really believe that. (Well, maybe MSN lies*.)

One way to get a more accurate count, if you have few enough results for a query, is to just go to the last page of results. You'll often get text like "results 10 - 13 of about 5000 results" on the last page.


* kidding