On 10/24/07, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
The devil's-statistical-advocate in me has to ask, though: 106,813 hits is, like, 2 and 2/3 seconds' worth, right? Is that a valid sample?
1:1000 sample covering 65 minutes, it's short but it's what I've got. ;)
So it's not the final word but should set our expectations in a particular direction in the absence of better information.
I feel that it's enough to establish that it's very unlikely that most searching uses google. ;)