Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2011 June 30

Computing desk
< June 29	<< May | June | Jul >>	July 1 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 30

Creating a mobile phone app part 2

Crap. So, I read through a good portion of the Android tutorial on creating mobile phone apps, and found out very quickly that it goes way over my head a short way into it. So, what if I want to recruit someone to develop this mobile application for me...what's the best way of going about it? I don't have any close friends that have this type of skill set, so I am looking for the best way to recruit someone; the going pay rate; should I offer a share of any future profits; and, most importantly, establishing myself as the sole copy right holder? Basically, I want to do this in a professional way, and minimize the risk of someone "stealing" my idea, or taking control of it in the future. Is this something that would require legal counsel to come up with a contract....or can I cover my ass through a basic "contract labor" agreement? Opinions welcomed. 03:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Is this an application you've already developed and just need to port to the Android platform ? Or is it just an idea ? If so, it may or may not be possible to code it. You might want to run it by a programmer you trust to see if it's possible, before hiring somebody to do it. StuRat (talk) 03:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Here are some ideas:

• Find some Android development online communities/forums, create a posting that you will pay for somebody to write an app for you. Give details, don't be vague. Check their prior projects.
• Go to a local college Computer Science department, and tell them you would like to create a contest and educational opportunity for students.
• Find a few (small) apps in the Android app store, go to the websites of the authors, and ask if they would be interested in writing an app for you.

Good luck.TheGrimme (talk) 13:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

There are companies that develop and promote phone app ideas, such as IDC Projects. -- kainaw™ 13:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Phone apps, business side

How do developers of phone apps get compensated ? StuRat (talk) 03:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

They probably get paid by the companies which employ them to write their code or come up with ideas. Or are you referring to something more intricate, like compensation based on the volume of sales of a particular piece of software? I was this close to writing something like by bank transfer. --Ouro (blah blah) 08:41, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

If by "developers" you mean the organisation (company) that creates and publishes an app, are several ways:

• paid downloads (an end user pays to download and install the app); its common to have a limited free edition, and a more fully-featured paid edition (or the free edition is trialware)
• ad supported (both Apple and Google have ad networks that share revenue with apps that host their ads)
• affinity or revenue sharing - for things like shopping or ticket booking or hotel finding, the app developer has some agreement with the network that's actually selling the product, and they share some of the revenue
• subscription (for something like a MMORPG)

There are also several classes of app which wouldn't expect to yield revenue themselves:

• where the app is an adjunct of a larger system (so, for example, if I create a corporate groupware system, I might have an iPhone and Android app for it, but I make the money off the groupware server licence)
• where the app is a promotional item

If by "developers" you really mean those who create the app, assuming they're not publishing it themselves, then it's just the same as other for-hire coders, designers, and artists. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 08:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I do mean independent developers that publish apps themselves. Is there some arrangement (like calling 976 numbers) where the phone bill includes those fees, and they are then passed on to the developers, or must every app developer make their own billing arrangements with customers ? StuRat (talk) 13:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The Apple App-Store and the Android Market act as a marketplace for those people; they collect the money, take a (large) cut, aggregate the result, and send the developer what's left. I honestly don't know about where VAT / sales tax is collected. Many Android phones allow loading of apps by other means ("sideloading"), and both Android phones and iPhones can be jailbroken (so apps can be installed from anywhere) but selling an app in such a case (where the app-store's usual protections aren't available) without it being copied for free is difficult. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I see. So how much is the developer's cut ? StuRat (talk) 13:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

For Android Market the developer gets 70% (ref). -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:52, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

App Store (iOS) says it's the same percentage (but Apple also charges a fee for signing apps, and I think there's a fee for them reviewing your app before they'll put it in the app store). -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks:

1) Do apps bill for a one-time purchase, a monthly rental, or per use ?

2) What ranges of prices are there ?

3) How are (free and non-free) app updates/upgrades handled ? StuRat (talk) 14:00, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

1. One time. But apps can do "in app billing" (which is where the user performs a transaction using the app, to see "buy" a digital good like a magic sword or a music track) - see [1]
2. Android's ranges are here. The bottom of the range is essentially determined at the point at which it's cost-effective for Google to make a credit-card transaction.
3. In Android, free is free. If I understand iOS App Store correctly, free apps still have to pay to be signed and reviewed. Apple's info about their App Store distribution is here.

-- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 14:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Is that in addition to the $99 fee you pay for the iOS SDK/join the developer program [2]? Note that the Android marketplace link seems to suggest they collect sales tax or GST/VAT in some countries. Nil Einne (talk) 18:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks all. StuRat (talk) 14:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Source of online topographic map

Does anyone know where this map is coming from: http://www.startribune.com/newsgraphics/124520694.html

It's a detailed topographic map. If you zoom in far enough, it shows individual house numbers, decks and sheds. Far better than other "free" online maps.

Samw (talk) 03:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean the outlines of houses and garages ? That's all I see, not house numbers, sheds, and decks; but perhaps the level of detail varies by location. StuRat (talk) 03:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, it looks like American cities have restricted info. Try Vancouver or Toronto. Samw (talk) 15:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

There's a logo in the bottom-right, that of GIS company ESRI. THe underlying topographic info will likely be a general topo dataset (like Shuttle Radar Topography Mission or something from USGS) that's been rendered with ESRI's map engine. With enough skill with GIS tools its possible to create something of comparable quality - consider File:Antelope Island State Park Map.jpg for example, created with ESRI's ArcGIS. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 08:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't notice the obvious ESRI logo. Yes, their website has the equivalent top maps. Hopefully that is permanent as this is the best "free" top map I've seen on the web. Thanks! Samw (talk) 15:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

As to the other layers, most developed countries are covered by several GIS layer providers who sell layers for buildings, electrical connections, water pipes, roads, sewerage, hydrology, rainfall, flood risk, fire risk, crime level, population, and so forth. Subscriptions to these services are often fairly expensive. It looks as if the Star Tribune has such a subscription, and employs (or perhaps subcontracts) someone with sufficient skills to make something informative and attractive out of the complex datasets. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 10:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

You don't have to go far out of the larger cities, to lose the building detail. eg: the building detail for Paris stops just outside the Boulevard Périphérique and the detail around New York City stops just past Newark Liberty Airport. Astronaut (talk) 15:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I wonder how they got that level of detail. If could be computer generated from satellite images, I supposes, but I'd expect more mistakes, then. Doing the whole thing by hand would be prohibitively expensive. Perhaps it's computer generated and then reviewed by humans, to catch the blatant mistakes. StuRat (talk) 17:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the quick response! Samw (talk) 15:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

A lot of USGS maps (that are still useful) are very old, and were in fact made by humans. ¦ Reisio (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but I don't think any of those showed decks and swimming pools for each house. StuRat (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Processor cloud

Anyone know of an online service that offers the user/subscriber access to multiple processors (thousands) presumably by assigning each processor a unique address just as memory addresses are assigned in order to support programs that have subroutines which are intended to run in parallel and not sequentially? --DeeperQA (talk) 10:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know of any. Sounds like you want to rent a data center! What theoretical use do you use for it? Trying to run Crysis? :) --24.249.59.89 (talk) 14:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

It's not practical to build computers with that architecture. The problem is that, when you have a whole lot of processors talking to one uniform pool of memory, performance goes down and cache coherence becomes a nightmare. This is why non-uniform memory access is being developed. Paul (Stansifer) 17:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry guys (or girls), I need responses from those experienced enough to know that server nodes normally come with sufficient storage for status, data and results and can incorporate fanless PCs, signal or video processors or even microcontrollers in a Beowulf's configuration that have easily expandable memory via SD cards or flash drives and which emphasize processing power rather than file space and know the universities or research computing facilities that offer up such systems for use by the public. --DeeperQA (talk) 01:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

In commercially available massively-parallel systems, CPUs do not have unique addresses. Network interfaces have unique addresses. We usually use the Internet Protocol to uniquely identify and communicate with a compute-node. We can construct an n-to-m mapping between n network-interfaces and m CPUs, facilitated by one or more instances of an operating system. If you don't like this scheme, and want to use a different addressing-scheme to access thousands of CPUs, you may need to pursue exotic computer architectures (that are not easily/commercially available). You can start by reading classifications of parallel computers. For example, the now-defunct SiCortex vector-computers, or the IBM Blue Gene computers used different protocols and methods to address compute-node function units. As Paul Stansifer has correctly pointed out, for most problems, esoteric vector architectures are very inefficient. Linear arrays scale ... linearly. Many other algorithms that are necessary for communication scale as the square of the number of nodes; see, for example, routing topologies. If you think you don't need these algorithms, reconsider how you will communicate unidirectionally, let alone bidirectionally, with your compute-nodes.

If you simply want to pretend that you have a linear array of CPUs, your best bet is to construct a simple software that abstracts a list of IP addresses as a simple array. Nimur (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Harvesting HDD from an external enclosure

I've noticed that when some external retail hard drives from a manufacturer goes on sale, the cost is actually less expensive than their new bare internal OEM drive of the same capacity. Is there any issue of disassembling the external case to liberate the bare drive? They aren't hard soldered to the USB bridge, are they? --24.249.59.89 (talk) 14:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I've never encountered one that was. Every one I've opened has been a run of the mill desktop or laptop drive, with a conventional PATA or SATA connector, and a USB interface chip. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 14:46, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Same here, they've all been attached with the same SATA or IDE connector. Can be kind of a bear to break into though sometimes. RxS (talk) 21:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Native USB drives exist ([3][4]), so you should check before buying. With the increasing popularity of USB hard drives I'd think that this would become increasingly common.

Also, opening the enclosure will void your warranty, so it's not financially prudent unless you value the warranty less than the price difference. Or, I suppose, if you're confident that you can reassemble the enclosure well enough to fool the manufacturer. -- BenRG (talk) 23:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

projected and non -projected visuals

please what are the differences between projected visuals and non projected visuals — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kofibarwuah (talk • contribs) 14:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm guessing this is in an educational context. If so, projected visuals are those which are, err, projected, such as overhead projectors, slide projectors, digital projectors. By a process of elimination, I guess non projected visuals are such things as handouts, books and objects best appreciated at desk by individuals rather than viewed en masse by the class. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm guessing you already know what they are, and are asking about the difference in quality, between, say, a projection TV and a non-projection TV, such as LCD or plasma. Here are some diffs:

1) While the projection could actually be brighter, if projected onto a small enough screen, it's typically dimmer, requiring a darkened room to view it.

2) A projected image can be distorted, depending on the location of the projector and shape of the screen. Similar distortions were also possible with a CRT TV (such as a the keystone effect), but aren't with newer types.

3) If the projector does the colors separately, you also have potential for colors to be misaligned. Again, this could happen with a CRT, too.

4) The projected image may be out of focus.

So, overall, a projected image is inferior, and is only used when the size of the screen is too large for other methods. StuRat (talk) 17:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Finding out why my laptop rebooted

Hey guys, I was wondering if there was a way to find out why my Windows Vista laptop rebooted itself during the night. I left it on so I could download some files overnight, but when I woke up this morning, I found that nothing was going on. My download manager was closed (the files hadn't downloaded either), and I checked on Task Manager to find that the computer had restarted itself around 3:33 AM. Is there any way I can find a reason for this reboot? I first suspected it may have been overheating, but usually when it overheats it simply shuts down, not restarts. I've checked Event Viewer but haven't found anything conclusive (or maybe I'm reading it wrong). Any ideas? Thanks. 141.153.214.125 (talk) 17:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I know you've said you've looked, but Event Viewer is likely where you need to look. The "System" log will at least show startup events so you'll see what time it started up. Look out for any Windows Updates as possibly you have your settings set to automatically install (and reboot). Or look out for a "WIndows recovered from an unexpected shutdown" which basically means a blue screen happened (it could also be caused by just turning off the power, but obviously you didn't do that). Actually, possibly you had a slight powercut maybe, enough for the computer to reboot. Sorry I'm not sure I'm being much help, but System and Application logs in Event Viewer are the two which will give you the clues.  ZX81  ^talk 18:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Checking all nodes of the Event Viewer is probably the best route. I would would also disable the feature where Windows automatically restarts the computer in the event of a fatal error, which might be happening. See this article on how to disable it in Windows 7, Vista, and XP. Additionally, you might find more help in the Computing section of the reference desk. TheGrimme (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

A couple of my machines have whinged at me to be rebooted over the last 24ish hours, having downloaded an MS security patch. It's possible your reboot was caused by that. I'm not sure what forensics are available in that department - the update history provides date-stamps but not time-stamps for each of the updates applied. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I was just going to say "security patch", too, because Windows machines are configured by default to restart after automatically downloading certain types of patches from Windows Update in the middle of the night; and Microsoft has issued several patches over the last week. If you go to the Control Panel and type "Windows Update" (don't hit Enter!) in the "Search Control Panel" field, you'll see an item called "Turn automatic updating on or off", if you are interested. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

firefox/ fedora 7 not behaving

Hi, I'm currently using Fedora 4, and I recently got a copy of the Linux Fedora 7 dvd/ live cd, and had a go at using the live cd. It doesn't recognise my printer, and firefox crashes every time I right click, whether on a link, or on a blank part of the page. My current (Fed 4) set up is a nuisance, because it doesn't recognise my printer, evolution email doesn't delete messages properly, it won't copy to cdrom, won't do most music and video apps, and firefox is highly sensitive to javascript content (wikipedia crashes with javascript on if I try to edit). Further, when I turn on the computer, it will only recognise the modem about 50% of the time, otherwise giving me a "SIOCSIFNETMASK" message saying the modem is unreachable. Nevertheless, I can live without a printer, as I hardly ever use it, I can reboot the system and it will recognise the modem second time round, and the other problems I can put up with. I want to upgrade to get a slick system that works in all these details, but it looks as though things are getting worse, and I'm not sure about taking any risks.

Firstly, if I upgrade, will Linux install if I change my mind and try to downgrade (putting Fedora 4 over a later version)? Secondly, does anyone know if the firefox crash (and printer woes) might only pertain to the live cd version I used (and not be found on the full install)? Finally, what's happening here? Surely someone could have tested Firefox and found it was just crashing all the time. Does it get better with later releases after Fedora 7, because I'm finding them hard to come by (not available in libraries and bookstores)? Thanks, It's been emotional (talk) 17:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

How do you have internet access? The latest releases of Fedora are comparably easily downloadable. Is your printer less than four years old? Fedora 7 stems from 2007, so it's not that old, and yet four years in computer science almost seems like forever. My first recommendation is to download a newer version of Fedora if possible and try to install that. Oh, what are the specs of the computer you are using? Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 21:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The live disks are not dependable. A smudge or scratch easily causes a situation where it boots, but there are many issues while trying to use the computer. Further, the live disks is a "first try". Usually, the first thing you do after installing from a live disk is install all the updates. After installing Fedora 15 (three days after the release), I had a good hour of updating. If there are bugs in the printer service (probably Hal in Fedora 7) or Firefox (version 2 in Fedora 7 if I remember correctly), they were likely fixed in updates, which will be difficult to get now. You are much better off getting Fedora 15. But, you mention a modem. If your computer is extremely old, I suggest getting a live disk with a very simple video display, like the LXDE version. Gnome and KDE will really task your hardware if your computer is old. -- kainaw™ 02:09, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks folks. The computer is 512MB, ~60gb hard drive, about 1 or 2 GHz Pentium (I think) dating from early 2005. I think the printer was from the same time. I use broadband, but am not keen on downloading an os because it would take ages, and one of the extra problems is my computer won't allow me to install things. I've tried many times, and even when I log in as root, nothing happens. I was using a live disk to check out Fedora 7, but don't want to install from a live disk (I also have the dvd) because it will wipe my system. Can I get an update with LXDE to install (I don't fancy relying on a live disk forever)? Why are Firefox updates hard to find? I'm hoping if I do upgrade, it won't be so hard to install updates with the new system. It's been emotional (talk) 09:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

You have some serious problems. It's not your computer that prevents you from installing things, it's Fedora 4. This of course is now an antique. If you have an external hard drive, how about copying all the files you want (including your mail, etc) to this hard drive, installing a new (lean) distro (something like Fuduntu, antiX, CrunchBang, perhaps), and then copying back? Updating Firefox--possibly called IceCat, IceWeasel, or something else--should then be simple. Tama1988 (talk) 10:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I have all the files I need copied to usb and the internet (I use gmail as a backup for critical stuff, in case a housefire destroys the lot at my end - better safe than sorry). I'm keen to stick with Fedora, since it's easy to get copies of the dvd's and I don't know where to find the leaner distros on dvd (downloading a whole os would be new to me, and I'd rather put up with a bit of irritation than spend the time). I just really need to know if anyone can tell me whether I can easily go back to Fedora 4, then I could take the risk. On the other hand, if you can tell me of a book with a good dvd in the back for a leaner distro, with no major bugs, suitable for my system, I'd be keen to find out, especially if it can keep my files from Fedora, since it would be finnicky making sure I've got every last detail copied. It's been emotional (talk) 11:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Difference between computers and humans

For me it's clear that routine tasks are performed better by computers, but what other differences are between human and computer processing? Wikiweek (talk) 21:02, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

If you're not familiar with it, a read of Chinese room might be instructive, as might links therefrom. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't see how the Chinese room argument can "instruct" anyone in anything but Searle's opinion. Searle believes that there is a quality that can reasonably be called "understanding", that it is possessed by humans, and that human-like behavior in an object is not sufficient to conclude that it has understanding. He believes that, no question; so what? It's not like the Chinese room argument justifies it in any way. It only appears to justify it if you were predisposed to believe it anyway. It's no more useful than other philosophers' foolish proofs of the existence of God. -- BenRG (talk) 04:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll bite. It is a very material argument in the debate about strong versus weak artificial intelligence. And that debate would seem close to the heart of the OPs question. To say "it's just his opinion, so what" is a self-limiting view which says more about your unwillingness to think about the issue, than it says about the issue. The debate has been going on for thirty of forty years amongst experts in the field; Searle's contribution being a not insignificant plank thereof. You'll forgive me if I go with the body of experts rather than a snotty and dismissive "so what" response from a random kid on a message board. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe BenRG is a kid and I don't believe the Chinese room says something about how humans/computers process information.88.14.198.240 (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Bio-inspired computing and its links might also be interesting. Note: You're incorrect about your first statement unless you really narrow down what "routine" means. If you mean "adding two integers", then yes; but a "routine" task for a human might be "recognizing the emotion that your mother is currently experiencing, in under one second", and humans currently are far superior to computers at that one. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The Chinese Room is a purely philosophical argument; it says nothing about any material differences between human and computer processing. In fact that's very much the entire point of the Chinese room argument: to think about two different ways of arriving at exactly the same result. I agree with BenRG that it's irrelevant to the question. APL (talk) 04:04, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

You might also check out Hubert Dreyfus's classic What Computers Can't Do. It's a bit dated but it serves as a nice introduction to thinking about the difference between human and machine cognition. There are very significant differences and as Comet Tuttle points out, "routine tasks" does not begin to address them. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:44, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

This book should have been called: "What Logical Rule-Based Systems using Variables but without Learning Can’t Do." Consider, however, that modern programs (which are able to learn) are approaching human mental abilities one step at a time. 88.14.198.240 (talk) 11:44, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Dreyfus (and Searle, for that matter) would dispute that you can approach human mental abilities incrementally, I believe. Searle in particular does not see human mental abilities as just scaled up computing. (Granted, I don't agree with either of them, but it's no response to say, "oh, we're getting there," to people who believe that machine processing and human thinking are fundamentally different. The challenge for them is to really explain why human thinking shouldn't be fundamentally algorithmic at its base, without an appeal to something supernatural.) --Mr.98 (talk) 14:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, we are not approaching what humans are, but what humans do. Indeed, computers are emulating human capabilities for sure, in the same sense that a wheel emulates legs (not being legs, but fulfilling the function of locomotion in a different way). If a complex computer could be conscious of itself (or is it already time to call it himself?) is a different topic. 88.14.198.240 (talk) 14:38, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Google search for "sex"

Does anybody have a clue why a Google search for "sex" brings up a toplink to Sex (book) rather than sex? --84.44.231.244 (talk) 22:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Google does not just list the most relevant search result. It also tries to adapt to you, and to adapt to results that are up-to-date (which is probably the case of this book). Wikiweek (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

On a somewhat related note, there was actually an interesting piece on Democracy Now! a few weeks ago, regarding the personalization of search engines, and how it creates an "echo chamber" that reinforces our biases, rather than leading us to new information. ~ Mesoderm (talk) 22:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I have the same problem! Fuck! Google must have somehow come to the conclusion that I'm an educated person :( :( How do I set it straight? 188.29.114.156 (talk) 22:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

To convince Google that you are less educated than the average is a daunting task. Start by not writing full sentences with proper grammar. 88.14.198.240 (talk) 11:56, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Private browsing modus should tackle the problem. In Firefox go to Tools > Start Private Browsing. Wikiweek (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Damn, it still gives sex book. At least it hasn't gone as far as putting 'The Mathematics of Sex' as the first result for me yet! ;-) Dmcq (talk) 23:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Under private browsing, it also gives Sex (book) for me, probably because it's up-to-date, and it's followed by the Massachusetts sex register directory, since Google also geo-locates, to offer us more relevant search results. Wikiweek (talk) 23:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

And this? http://www.google.com/search?q=sex ¦ Reisio (talk) 01:29, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem is. You need to refine your search. Which sex? Do you want medical advice or porn? What are you actually searching for?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

You cannot expect that a search engine outputs good results with one word input. Just try the same query with a female human to see how poor the input is. 88.14.198.240 (talk) 11:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

For me and Google.com (not .co.nz), the first search result for 'women' is woman which seems fair enough. The second 'iVillage - the daily destination for women, with an active women's community, horoscopes, health and pregnancy information, message boards' which is also not unreasonable. The third result is 'Top 99 Most Desirable Women of 2011 - AskMen' which also seems reasonable considering the earlier results. For 'woman' we get the same first result. The second result is [5] 'Woman definition, the female human being'. The third result is 'Enjoy Woman magazine, on sale every Tuesday, packed full of celebrity gossip, real life stories, fashion, beauty, healthy recipes, diet & relationship' which is I guess a little strange. google.co.nz is slightly stranger and the ad results lean to one obvious direction.

BTW the OP could emigrate to NZ if they are unhappy with the results for 'sex'. For google.co.nz my first result is the NSFW and blacklisted www.pornhub.com and there a bunch more similar results compared to the .com which is filled with sex offender registers.

Nil Einne (talk) 12:10, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

If I Google 'Sex', (not something that I would normally do of course), the first item is a lead to "Porn Hub", so I MIGHT look again after all!--85.211.228.45 (talk) 13:21, 6 July 2011 (UTC)