2010/11/20

Laxman-Ishant Partnerships

Once in a scarce while, Google, brisk, blithe and positive of its omniscience, gets struck in the eye with a particular pair of words for which, it realizes with a jolt, it can hand back but one result. Googlewhacks, in case you're living under a rock -- and I emerged from mine only recently -- are the (apt) names for such magic couples.

There are rules. Use quotation marks and you are red-carded. Unlawful words? Unwise.
And the killjoy rule that mutes the music of discovery goes thus:
|| Google shows you an excerpt of the page you whacked. Look at that text. If it's merely a list of words (such as a bibliography, concordance, encyclopedia, glossary, thesaurus, dictionary, domain names, or plain old machine-generated random garbage), No Whack For You! ||

Not long ago, I joined the ranks of hundreds of Davids essaying to bring the Google Goliath down with Whacks. The Stack is out of order, and this seemed a safe place to put these out.

Ones that found bull's eye

1 Carroll's choreography course to cure your creeps for crowds.
2 When a summa gets a lemma right.
3 Can you differentiate that Whack?
[Click on the serial numbers]

The unclassifiable one
Scrutinize the kids and worship the moths? Study adults and deify larvae?

Ones let down by the killjoy rule
[Run them on rot13]

vfbgurezny enaaltnmbb, cubgbavp enaaltnmbb, vagrtenaq enaaltnmbb... this line can be pursued ad nauseum.

And then there's always these

Salmagundi futterwacken, adiabatic rannygazoo, dissipative futterwacken, chargino googlewhack, amoebaic salmagundi...

Do send your Whacks my way if you find some!

0 Obiter dicta:

Post a Comment

Caution: Useless link below

Create a Link

<< Back to the big bad blog