Looking for search engines (under these conditions)

[Jim Verard]

Greetings.

I am looking for some good search engines, however, considering these conditions.

* They must not rely or support Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL, ASK.com companies. For instance, check http://www.metacrawler.com or http://www.scroogle.org - I am NOT looking for these.

* They must not record searches (logs deleted) and not use cookies - this feature is important, but optional

* They must have some good image search feature.

* They must not require Javascript to be enabled in order to be used. And please, no family filter enabled by default!

I have these until now:

http://pesquisa.sapo.pt (good choice for me, since I speak portuguese)
http://clusty.com (thanks to Paranoid)
http://www.gigablast.com (few results)

Could you please recommend others? I think these are good choices, and Sapo.pt is the only one who may send me good portuguese results. But the main problem is: they have a pretty bad image search results.

Altavista.com and even Google are much better if you're looking for some pictures (by using keywords you get good results). Altavista.com also have video searchs, which is not available on Google.

[WSFuser]

Maybe Mojeek.com? It does not have an image search though you can use a separate one like Picsearch.com

[innerpeace]

This should get you started. http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=170151

[SpikeyB]

Here's one I came across recently: http://www.ixquick.com/

[Jim Verard]

{QUOTE-> This should get you started. http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=170151 <-QUOTE}Thanks, but this research done with 100 search engines has so many bad results that I was impacient to keep looking (many of them have almost none results compared to Google, Altavista and others).

And some of them are not fit on the terms described on this thread (not only because they support/rely on these companies like Google, but requires Javascript to be enabled). Links are also broken and like I said, the results are awful (and can't cover a good piece of the internet).

I want independent search engines and companies.

{QUOTE-> Here's one I came across recently: http://www.ixquick.com/ <-QUOTE}I knew Ixquick, but it has no use for me either (however, it's on the last position of my favorites bookmark). From their FAQ:

Ixquick is a metasearch engine: when you search Ixquick, you are searching many popular search engines, such as Yahoo/AltaVista, Gigablast, Ask Jeeves/Teoma, Open Directory and many others, at the same time. Combined, these engines cover more of the Internet than any one search engine.

[lotuseclat79]

Hi Jim,

You might try BLACK BOX SEARCH... no IP, no tracking cookies, no logging - EVER!
here (http://www.blackboxsearch.com/).

Don't be confused by the appearance of Google, Yahoo, and MSN search windows on their search page portal. They use proxies, so the results returned to you keep your IP virtually non-existent.

You might try Googlonymous which you can get at the Mycroft Project website.

I happen to like mamma, a meta-search engine, but it may not be what you want.

-- Tom

[Jim Verard]

lotus, thanks for your help, but I will not use any search engine who relies or support Google, Yahoo, MS, AOL or Ask.com. It doesn't matter if they don't log anything. They are not an independent company.

I wonder if there are any good search engines left on the internet, these days. :dry:

[Jim Verard]

Some useful information:

{QUOTE-> A meta-search engine is a search engine that sends user requests to several other search engines and/or databases and returns the results from each one. Meta search enables users to enter search criteria once and access several search engines simultaneously. Since it is hard to catalogue the entire web, the idea is that by searching multiple search engines you are able to search more of the web in less time and do it with only one click.

Metasearch engines create what is known as a virtual database. They do not compile a physical database or catalogue of the web. Instead, they take a user's request, pass it to several other heterogeneous databases and then compile the results in a homogeneous manner based on a specific algorithm.

No two metasearch engines are alike. Some search only the most popular search engines while others also search lesser-known engines, newsgroups, and other databases.

They also differ in how the results are presented and the quantity of engines that are used. Some will list results according to search engine or database. Others return results according to relevance, often concealing which search engine returned which results. This benefits the user by eliminating duplicate hits and grouping the most relevant ones at the top of the list.

Search engines frequently have different ways they expect requests submitted. For example, some search engines allow the usage of the word "AND" while others require "+" and others require only a space to combine words. The better metasearch engines try to synthesize requests appropriately when submitting them.

Results can vary between metasearch engines based on a large number of variables. Still, even the most basic metasearch engine will allow more of the web to be searched at once than any one stand-alone search engine.

On the other hand, the results are said to be less relevant, since a metasearch engine can’t know the internal “alchemy” a search engine does on its result (a metasearch engine do not have any direct access to the search engines’ database).

Metasearch engines are sometimes used in vertical search portals, and to search the deep web.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metasearch_engine <-QUOTE}

{QUOTE-> Meta-search: More heads better than one?:

By Raul Valdes-Perez, News.com
Published on ZDNet News: Mar 31, 2005 1:00:00 PM

Commentary -- Meta-search engines send a user's query to multiple search engines and blend the top results from each into one overall list.

A final step can involve clustering the combined results, but both meta-search and regular search engines can be clustered, so the clustering issue is separate. It’s been claimed that meta-search is inherently worse than regular search engines. We assert the contrary: meta-search has intrinsic advantages that are based on voting.

According to the UC Berkeley Teaching Library Internet Workshops (http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/MetaSearch.html), "`Smarter’ meta-searcher technology includes clustering and linguistic analysis that attempts to show you themes within results, and some fancy textual analysis and display that can help you dig deeply into a set of results.

However, neither of these technologies is any better than the quality of the search engine databases they obtain results from. ... We recommend directly searching each search engine and recommend AGAINST using meta-searchers."

If this "two heads cannot be better than one" approach were true, then there would be no value in having nine Supreme Court Justices; just appoint one Solomon. Folk wisdom asserts the contrary: two heads are better than one.

General Web crawlers today are harmed by the noise of blog cross-linking, link-bombing or Google-bombing, and commercial efforts to skew PageRank scores. News search engines are "noisy" because ranking news is even more arbitrary than ranking cross-linked web pages.

Greg Notess has often reported on how little overlap occurs (http://searchengineshowdown.com/stats/overlap.shtml) among the top results of regular engines like AltaVista, Google, Yahoo, etc. The overlapping search results are presumably better than the unique hits found by a single engine, but these unique hits compete for space and user attention with the consensus-best results, which the user is unable to distinguish from the unique hits.

To see how meta-search can lead to improved results, consider how electrical engineers perform averaging of noisy signals, which cancels out random noise and reveals the original noise-free signal. Since Web noise affects regular search engines in different ways, meta-search filters noise by averaging the votes of the underlying engines, revealing the consensus best results.

For meta-search engines to live up to this promise, they must combine search results by weighted voting, not by round-robin, they must not overly bias their results by inserting too many paid listings, and they should use as many underlying search engines as is practical.

Meta-search improves on search engines by canceling noise. Nine good heads are better than one Solomon, both in Justice and on the Web.

[b]biography
Raul Valdes-Perez is CEO and co-founded of Vivisimo, a provider of search, meta-search and clustering software, and parent company of Clusty.com.

Source: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5647280.html <-QUOTE}

[Jim Verard]

Another search engine was found (and again, using the portuguese language).:

www.aonde.com.br

I was looking this week another list from search engines and got lucky to find this one between many others.

Every other related links from search engines are broken now, or at least are useless (some of them display no results for simple searchs). It's rather odd to see how the world was conquered by a few companies like Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and AOL.

Back in the old days, many search engines were available. Now, we can count each one using our fingers. ::)

Another one (I just found out this exact minute):

www.exalead.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exalead

[lotuseclat79]

Hi Jim,

Yeah, I think I read somewhere Vivisimo formed or is or became Clusty.

Here is an article you might find interesting 8 Ways for Searching the Dark Web - Beyond Google! (http://www.askreamaor.com/search-engines/8-ways-for-searching-the-dark-web-beyond-google/).

Thanks for the info posted!

-- Tom

[Jim Verard]

Correcting my previous post since the Edit button was removed after some time. :P

Aonde doesn't fit on the terms listed before. It's a search engine which is currently using Yahoo resources (to be more specific, Overture.com company) everytime you click on the results (Overture is redirecting only).

Actually Sapo.pt is far better when comparing to Clusty.com than I thought. I tried to find out one single word and Sapo delivered about 9.420 results, while Clusty provided 83 results without any modifications on the cluster settings (100 results by default).

I have modified to 500 cluster results * (the maximum limit), and the number increased to 182 results (clustering about 500 results in all languages with adult filter off). It's a huge difference. However, Sapo.pt don't use cache for any websites found, only a link to similar pages. Clusty use this feature, and might have some exclusive or relevant results.

* This modification apparently doesn't require cookies to be performed.

I am quite satisfied with this Portuguese portal. However, it's impossible to rely on any search engines listed on this thread, even PicSearch, when you have to search for images/pictures of any kind. I think I'll have to use Altavista (Yahoo search engine) for that kind of job. The results of any image searches are light-years better than the others.

Oops, I almost forgot. :)

Exalead has found 825 results by using the same term, and

Gigablast = worst than all the others. First, he shows more than 10k results. When you click to see the results, the number turns to be 367. After you start to looking for each page of 10 results, you find out that the correct number was 107 (when the only link available is "Previous 10 posts"). The problem is, 90% of results from Gigablast are completely irrelevant. They are also using a cache feature.

[true north]

Hi there,

looking for GOLD? That is not so easy this days, but.....
If you are serious interested in search engines than you should read some background material first in order to understand what a search engine can provide and what not! There are many specialized engines out there but that all depend what you are looking for. You can search by learning by doing or by learning before doing it. Professional searcher seldom use the www.
Here are some infos, see for yourself. Good luck !!!!

http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3627468

http://www.allsearchengines.com/

http://www.searchenginecolossus.com

http://www.finderseeker.com/

http://www.refdesk.com/newsrch.html

http://www.searchengineguide.com/searchengines.html


true north

[true north]

Hi there,

for people they are interested in NEWS about new trends in search engines:
there is a home page that offered every month an up-date of WHAT is new and coming up;
http://www.altsearchengines.com/category/the-top-100-lists/

click on NEWS and have fun, the top 100 engines !!!!!!!!!

true north

[true north]

Hi there;

the search engine ASK will change their privacy rules:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7138260.stm

true north

[lotuseclat79]

Ask.com Launches AskEraser Giving Searches Ability To Search Anonymously
Article here (http://searchengineland.com/071211-000001.php).

Two things:
1) It is not retroactive, so previous ask.com searches stay on server for 18 mos.
2) Don't know whether when activated by visiting the ask.com website and turning it off, it will be active for future Firefox search window searches for a user without visiting ask.com with web browser to do the search.

-- Tom

[TonyW]

{QUOTE->
I knew Ixquick, but it has no use for me either (however, it's on the last position of my favorites bookmark). From their FAQ:

Ixquick is a metasearch engine: when you search Ixquick, you are searching many popular search engines, such as Yahoo/AltaVista, Gigablast, Ask Jeeves/Teoma, Open Directory and many others, at the same time. Combined, these engines cover more of the Internet than any one search engine. <-QUOTE}Clusty, in your list of favourites, is also a metasearch search engine:{QUOTE-> Clusty queries several top search engines, combines the results, and generates an ordered list based on comparative ranking. This "metasearch" approach helps raise the best results to the top and push search engine spam to the bottom. <-QUOTE}

[Jim Verard]

Thank you lotus, true north and others for all contributions.

Good point, Tony. I didn't see that coming, although Clusty never looked like a real search engine for me.

However, Clusty doesn't specify from where they retrieve these results. So, in the end, he might be listed on my terms because there's no sign or traces of the other companies like Google and Yahoo on their searches.

I don't usually use Clusty because they provide me just a few results. Sapo.pt it's still the best choice, and gives me much more results and some of them on my language, which is portuguese, so it's perfect for me (since Clusty speaks english).

What I was seeking all the time was a list of search engines who actually are working alone, without interference of any others like Google or Yahoo. But as you can see, since Google arrived, they simply vanished. It's very hard to find one these days, which is sad.

I also have Google images bookmarked here, when I have to search for images, unfortunately all the others sucks.

I was also looking for an article who says that in order to provide a search engine, the costs are very high, which might explain why there are only a bunch of search engines in the world. I don't remember where I saw this explanation.

[TonyW]

{QUOTE->
However, Clusty doesn't specify from where they retrieve these results. So, in the end, he might be listed on my terms because there's no sign or traces of the other companies like Google and Yahoo on their searches. <-QUOTE}According to their FAQ:{QUOTE-> Clusty retrieves results from Ask, Open Directory, Gigablast and others. To see which search engines returned results for your query, click on the “Details” link at the top of the search results list. <-QUOTE}

[lotuseclat79]

Group says Ask's privacy feature is flawed
Article here (http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9836002-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20).

{QUOTE-> A group of privacy advocates is asking Ask.com to make some changes to its new AskEraser feature so that it better protects consumers' privacy when they conduct Web searches. <-QUOTE}-- Tom

[Shunted]

Some comments to the post of that privacy group:

{QUOTE-> The first one is the fact that AskEraser uses an opt-out cookie. Cookies are bits of software left on a consumer's computer that are used to authenticate the user and maintain information such as the user's site preferences.

Usually, people concerned with privacy delete cookies, so creating an opt-out cookie is "counter-intuitive," the letter states. Once the AskEraser opt-out cookie is deleted, the privacy setting is lost and the consumer's search activity will be tracked. Why not have an opt-in cookie instead, the letter suggests. <-QUOTE}

I think this is silly. Counter intuitive? I'm sure. But it makes sense. Ask says they want to keep most of the queries for analyzing, to help make the results better, just like the other search engines. They are even without the opt-out far better:


Ask removes everything after 18 months,
Google removes part of IP and part of cookie data after 18 months, store with query forever
Yahoo! does like Google, but after 13 months
Microsoft keeps queries forever, but thrashes IP and cookies after 18 months.


If most users don't care enough to set the cookie, I don't think this is a real problem. They'll have bookmarks and save time while the data will reasonably soon be removed and until then helps to improve results. Meanwhile, the paranoids like me can feel a bit safer from the black helicopters.

{QUOTE-> The second problem is that Ask inserts the exact time that the user enables AskEraser and stores it in the cookie, which could make identifying the computer easier and make it easy for third-party tracking if the cookie were transferred to such parties. The letter recommends using a session cookie that expires once the search result is returned. <-QUOTE}

I think Ask views this as a way to find new customers, and putting the time in the cookie is intended to track loyality somewhat, that is, how long has this feature been on? Taking a big step forward in the privacy of web searching, I can't really blame them for this, while obviously, i'd prefer this not being included.

I certainly don't like the idea of session cookies, as these must be set repeatedly. Set the cookie to not be deleted instead, if you care.

What would be nice would be a convention on a time to put into the cookie among paranoids as this would circumvent it. Why not say 19840101 00:00, would help if it was common.

{QUOTE-> Ask's Frequently Asked Questions for the feature notes that there may be circumstances when Ask is required to comply with a court order and if asked to, it will retain the consumer's search data even if AskEraser appears to be turned on. Ask should notify consumers when the feature has been disabled so that people are not misled into thinking their searches aren't being tracked when they actually are, the letter said. <-QUOTE}

This is probably illegal.

[Jim Verard]

Ask is a search engine from Microsoft, and that is quite enough reason for why it can't be trusted.

Microsoft is well known for their surveillance practices. When I recall my Hotmail accounts deleted and months (even almost a year) after, they are still not removed, I can't trust to put my hands on anything from them.

It doesn't matter if they say: "we are deleting everything after 18 months". This is bullshit, a fairy tale to lure ignorant people.

A trusted company should never log anything, including IPs, in the first place.

The same goes for Yahoo and specially Google.

[Shunted]

{QUOTE-> Ask is a search engine from Microsoft, and that is quite enough reason for why it can't be trusted. <-QUOTE}

?? What? Check your facts dude, Microsoft's search engine is called Live Search.. Ask is owned by IAC/InterActiveCorp, run by Barry Diller. Whatever you think about that it's not Microsoft, right? Or am I missing the big conspiracy here?

{QUOTE-> Microsoft is well known for their surveillance practices. When I recall my Hotmail accounts deleted and months (even almost a year) after, they are still not removed, I can't trust to put my hands on anything from them. <-QUOTE}

Well, not erasing your mail and recycling your account name is hardly surveillance. If you really think this, you're paranoia threshold is really low. 2 MB of hotmail, easily erased by yourself. This could be related to you having a MSN messenger account, I'm not sure, but I've experienced the same.

{QUOTE-> It doesn't matter if they say: "we are deleting everything after 18 months". This is bullshit, a fairy tale to lure ignorant people. <-QUOTE}

Nahh.. Too much conspiracy, someone could blow the whistle.

As for privacy invaders, I don't see Microsoft on top positions. And that WGA thing ... tells them you're using Windows with a particular locale ... very incriminating.

{QUOTE-> A trusted company should never log anything, including IPs, in the first place.

The same goes for Yahoo and specially Google. <-QUOTE}

Well sure that would be ideal, but I agree that there is a point in analyzing queries to improve the results. Don't you agree they take a big step by allowing opt-out, and for everyone else, erasing everything after 1 1/2 year? Neither offered by other search engines not querying logging engines.

Not happy? I say two thumbs up. Hopefully others will follow. Microsoft actually has hinted they might..

[Jim Verard]

{QUOTE-> ?? What? Check your facts dude, Microsoft's search engine is called Live Search.. Ask is owned by IAC/InterActiveCorp, run by Barry Diller. Whatever you think about that it's not Microsoft, right? Or am I missing the big conspiracy here? <-QUOTE}Hmmm...

http://www.searchenginejournal.com/askcom-ceo-steve-berkowitz-leaves-for-microsoft/3310/

{QUOTE-> Well, not erasing your mail and recycling your account name is hardly surveillance. If you really think this, you're paranoia threshold is really low. 2 MB of hotmail, easily erased by yourself. This could be related to you having a MSN messenger account, I'm not sure, but I've experienced the same. <-QUOTE}My Hotmail account was deleted for good, and even after that, it was still activated, and the period described on their privacy policy was not respected. Not even the worst companies are doing that. And I assure you, I was not using MSN Messenger. In fact, not considering Windows XP, I don't use anything from Microsoft.

About privacy concerns, Microsoft share informations to partners (subsidiaries, affiliated companies, trusted businesses or persons) and permits third party advertisers to deploy cookies. They lack adequate detail of retention periods, data flows and targeting techniques.

{QUOTE-> Nahh.. Too much conspiracy, someone could blow the whistle. <-QUOTE}There's no conspiracy here. Just reality. I am not blind to believe that after all Google, Yahoo and others have done against our privacy, they are willing to put their tail behind their legs and erase all data about us. How can you be sure about that?

This is ridiculous, and I am surprised that anyone can be so naive to believe in all those lies.

[Shunted]

Read your link about Steve Berkowitz, former CEO of Ask. Seems he's done some really good things like buying and incorporating the technology of the Teoma search engine (http://about.ask.com/en/docs/about/ask_technology.shtml). Previously they were mainly about asking actual questions, and employers actually reading the most common questions.. I think he got the company in the right direction here with this big change, I like the search results. I see nothing strange in he getting a new job at Microsoft. However, I miss the Jeeves mascot a little.

About hotmail and Microsoft and privacy: Yeah, I don't say that Microsoft are great here. But don't you think they are sort of still left in the "if they don't click my banner, I'll make it bigger & blinking faster & add sound" kind of thinking? Annoying as hell, but on the same time, this is dumb advertising too. On the other hand, Google are intelligent and tries really hard to make a profile of you to be "relevant", and they have so many ways to do this. How often are you really on www.msn.com ? I've probably been there less then 5 minutes totally. And what do they know except from what you do there?

And hotmail again. They offered 2 MB of space, around this time I probably used Yahoo! with a whopping 6 MB. Then Google aced it with 1000 MB. Don't you think it's clear who wants to scan your mail? But yes, I always manually remove mail before I close an account.

Same thing with Instant Messaging, MSN has a banner in their client. That's ugly. Google offers to save all your chats forever. That's profiling. Microsoft just has an alias for me so I can have an IM account. Google knows my name from Gmail, and my credit card from Checkout, some of my searches and what pages I visited that have their ads or stats. I'm sure I haven't been paranoid enough here. But I think it's clear who wants to get to know you, or actually does.

* I am not blind to believe that after all Google, Yahoo and others have done against our privacy, they are willing to put their tail behind their legs and erase all data about us. How can you be sure about that?

Because I think they are smart enough to not lie about things that are quite easily checked. They are not small spyware companies hiding in a cellar. Microsoft makes a lot more money from operating systems and office software. As for Google's cookie games (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/17/google_changes_cookie_policy/), this is dishonest but not outright lying. Do you not think Microsoft can do without knowing who searched for something particular after 1 1/2 year, or Ask cannot make it without knowing what was searched 1 1/2 year ago? I think this means some disadvantages, but not as big as being exposed lying about data retention.

[iceni60]

ask sends browsing information to google even if you are using AskEraser.

[AKAJohnDoe]

The only way I know of to truly search without a trace is to physically relocate to geographically dispersed locations.

[user4]

This one is pretty good and it seems to be independent. Privacy policy looks OK. But it doesn't do image search.
http://www.reallybigsearch.com/

German metasearch. Doesn't use cookies or Session-IDs and doesn't store IP addresses. You can select the search engines it uses yourself.
http://meta.rrzn.uni-hannover.de/

Another German metasearcher that doesn't store your information. And it does do image search as well.
http://www.websynapse.de/

An independent, small and not so good search engine that does do image search. But there is no information about their privacy policy.
http://www.homerweb.com/

[clambermatic]

It may not be for everyone's taste but "alltheweb" (affiliated with yahoo thou) gives good results on papers/docx (specially researches) & image searches. Am still using it and my eldest use it too.

Vivisimo the metasearch is also effective, to me.

[user4]

http://www.entireweb.com/

[Jim Verard]

I was looking more carefully today inside Sapo.pt search engine and I noticed that all hyperlinks from the bottom of the page (after you searched for anything) have the following path (and you have to click them to switch the page and have more results):


pesquisa.sapo.pt/search?base=Google&page=2&location=pt&st=web&channel=2006&slice=5&barra=mundial&q=Put here what you were searching!&limit=10


So, that means, after all, they are also related to Google! I was wondering where did they get so many results.

And judging for this hyperlink they are related, even if this is not explicit described anywhere. :P

[true north]

Hi there,

Since the interest in search engines here in the Wilder's forum is quite a bit overwhelming, I would like to add something the most people are not aware of; the fact that the the Internet has two parts:
Number one: the World Wide Web or www.com search on a daily basis
Number two: the Invisible Web or Deep Web or also known as Hidden Web.
The "normal" search engines DO NOT work in this web !!!! Why ??
Read here:http://library.rider.edu/scholarly/rlackie/Invisible/Inv_Web.html

Here some search engines for the Invisible Web you may try:

http://www.incywincy.com/
http://www.freepint.com/gary/direct.htm
http://infomine.ucr.edu
http://aip.completeplanet.com/aip-engines/browse?thisPage=%2Fbrowse%2Fbrowse.jsp&successPage=%2Fbrowse%2Fbrowse.jsp&errorFlag=&errorMsg=&event=loadPageEvent&directPage=&directSection=4&treeQueryExpr=&treeQueryType=phrase&treeQueryTarget=tree
http://www.trueffles.com/index.jsp
http://www.scitopia.org/scitopia/

Have fun !!!

True north

[true north]

Hi there,

Social networks play a more and more important role in our daily life. To find personal information about someone we know or might to know is sometimes tricky and not an easy task. But there is help. Now we have special META SEARCH ENGINES for SOCIAL NETWORKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You will be amazed what you can find about others on the web, but what about PRIVACY ??? It all begins with YOU !!!!! What YOU not put on the web is NOT easy to find about you. So, have a look.

http://www.123people.com/en/page/about

http://www.spock.com/

www.rapleaf.com


Have fun OR be shocked.

true north

[true north]

Hi there,

Here is something for the lifelong learners:

http://www.websearchguide.ca/

Enjoy!!!

true north

[true north]

Hi there;

There is a new search engine out as today which claims to protect TOTALLY your PRIVACY, period. And ... the engine is faster and bigger than Google !!!
Here you come: www.cuil.com
Enjoy !!!!!

true north

[true north]

Hi there,

Searching for information these days is much more difficult than ever before. Search engines are the tool to use, but... The leader in this field of daily use is still GOOGLE even not Privacy friendly. There are many other engines out there witch enables users for more specific search topics like music, videos and so on.
The key is still to separate the waste of information from the nuggets YOU are looking for. The intelligence community has long ago developed software that better understand and present what is really important to find in the information jungle. Competitive Intelligence Software is one of this applications.
This software is not cheap and not useful for every one.
But sometimes luck is just around the corner.
A free intelligence (semantic) search engine is available:
www.cluuz.com
Read carefully all the infos in order to understand how this amazing engine works and can provide you with " the gold that you are looking for".
Good luck.

true north