>How about when the potential employer makes a few phone calls to their previous work history?

a) Once upon a time, Amazon outsourced that to another company. I don't know if they still do that;

b) Most employment verification is computer to computer. Whilst Amazon may have records that firm # 1 contacted them to verify employment, they won't necessarilly know why employment verification was needed;

There is no such thing as unbaised, in the world of search. What happens is that there are results that are more likely, and less likely to be what the person doing the search wanted. But even that is iffy.

The major, if not only virtue Google currently has over other search engines, is that it has indexed more content. However, that doesn't mean that the user seeking that indexed content will find it on Google.

A company willing to commit around US$100,000 up front for hardware, and then around US$10,000 a quarter for hardware, can have their own in-house search engine. A search engine that keeps track of the parts of the Internet that the organization is most focused upon.

Money buys technology and food.
People buys time.

When push comes to shove, only two things matter:
* How well the hardware works;
* How well trained the operator is, in using the hardware;

An army that use 3D printed guns won't last as long as an army that uses guns machined from metal blocks.

Twenty people with guns, but don't know how to pull the trigger on the guns, will die, when somebody who knows how to use a sword, puts it to work on them.

Nuance leads the pack, becuase their business model is to buy out the competition, or eliminate them through excessively high royalites for the non-patents that the USPTo grants to organizations that engage in ongoing racketering and extortion.

>Eliminate biased studies and the rest can see the light of day.

If it wasn't for some researchers fudging data, breaking every rule in the book, about research design, there never would have been any pilots from Tuskegee, during WW2.

In this case, the bias of the researchers, and the funders, was a goodness.

>until a study gets obsoleted by newer, superior studies thus gets shorter

In my field, most of the research from the last two decades is pure unmitigated crap. Basic errors in research protocol are so common, that the few people who read, and review everything, remark when there are no research protocol errors.

(It is pathetic to see a study by an author of a university textbook or research protocol, do a study that fails to adhere to what is in the book on research protocol that has their name on it.)

>the technology is here, the problem is paywalls.

Whilst both indexing and accurate bibliographic citation in those paywalls has improved, for fields of study that are way off the mainstream, the only way to ensure that all relevant articles from a journal are correctly indexed, for that non-mainstream field of study, is to go through each article, in each volume of the journal, doing the appropriate indexing it yourself.

> Probably No scientific institution in the world has access to all the journals that cover the relevant fields of the institution.

Even by using Inter-library loan, accessing the articles is an issue. Especially since libraries started dumping their hard copy journals.

You do realize that 100% of the published peer-reviewed research, where the patients were diagnosed according to the standard protocols of homeopathy, resulted in a 100% cure, don't you.

And you do further realize that 70% of the published peer-reviewed research on homeopathy does not diagnose the patient according to the standard protocols of homeopathy, don't you.

What you are forgetting is that most publishers neither know, nor care about correctly formatting an eBook, whether it be in PDF, ePub, Mobi, LIT, or other file format.

>A fucking 360 didn't have a 45 minute boot time.

I had a Dell laptop running Win7 that took about an hour to boot up. I took two videos:
* The first one was from when I clicked on the mouse, to restart the system, until the login screen after rebooting was displayed;
* The second one was from I clicked on the mouse, to shut the system down. Then pressed the start key, and watch the entire boot process, until the login screen is presented;

When I uploaded them to YouTube, they were rejected, due to their length. To this day, I have no idea why Win7 took so long to boot up.

I also had a BSD box that took about ten hours to boot up. That was because it ran a disk integrity checker, then tripwire, and then something else. Roughly three terrabytes of data files to check, every time it booted up.

For most sites, the two most critical things to track you are:
* Originating IP Address;
* User-Agent String;

However, I've noticed an increasing number of sites that are not functional, when there is no referring header, or when adblock, or one of its variants is installed.

Proving the existence of anybody who was born more than roughly 500 years ago, is, at best, problematic.

Finding any evidence of a person who was a nobody from the backwoods of an insignificant country, when they lived two thousand years ago is pretty much guaranteed to be "not going to happen".

A country bumpkin, without political authority, spiritual authority, or money is usually going to be a nobody. 2000 years ago, it would have been a nobody. That is what Jesus was.

That we have biographies about Jesus, is something to ponder. The way you prove that there was no Jesus, is by categorically rejecting any evidence that might support the thesis that there was a Jesus.

Athiest: There is no god.
Theist: There is a god.
Polytheist: There are many gods.

Gnostic: I know.
Agnostic: I do not know.

Claiming a theist is an athiest, becuase said theist appears to doubt the existence of one diety, whilst accepting the existence of another diety, is as illogical as it is irrational, as it is delusional.

The so-called state-of-the-art about the existence of God, starts with the axiom that there is no God, but refuses to acknowledge that as an axiom.

>And I'm pretty sure Buddhists are okay with gay

Whilst there are variations, the primary "Thou Shalts", and "Thou Shalt Not" mandate celibacy.

Of course, those precepts do not apply the masses, becuase they are unwilling to do the work required for spiritual progress, preferring the insecurity of their delusions.