I had to give up when the first example of a "bug" that the author could see, which others are blind to, was search results.

"In some cases, people sent me their actual search results. In every such case, the search results did not contain a good result that I could see"

Software that does not meet expectations, especially in a field like search, which is basically a long running war between SEO and search engines, is not a 'bug'. That's like saying there is 'bug blindness' in the publishing industry because when I pick up a random book, it sucks, even though others think it's fine. Sure, maybe something is wrong, could even be improved, but lets save the word 'bug' for something more specific.

> the first example of a "bug" that the author could see, which others are blind to, was search results

The author explicitly says he is using less specific and compelling examples for good reasons:

> I don't want to give any specific examples where it was my job to see how well the thing worked because, even if the internal examples are meant in a constructive, blameless, way, they may not always read that way when re-posted externally, so I'll give a few less interesting and less well supported "random" examples.

https://danluu.com/bug-blind/

I also think it's reasonable to use the term "bug" in a broad or colloquial sense. If a web server is overloaded, that isn't a bug in the strictest sense, but it sure feels like a bug to the person trying to use the website. A search engine is software, and if it fails to surface the most relevant document from its index then I'd say that counts as a bug. Also the author acknowledges this SEO spam issue, e.g. in this quote for the linked post:

> Here's a fun experiment to try. Take an open source project such as yt-dlp and try to find it from a very generic term like "youtube downloader". You won't be able to find it because of all of the content farms that try to rank at the top for that term

https://danluu.com/seo-spam/

At what point does search quality degrade to the point where is becomes a bug?

A bug is when actual behavior does not match stated or intended behavior. If the search bears little connection to what was searched for, then it is a bug, as far as the user is concerned.

Or maybe you mean to say we should reserve the word bug for deviations that are unintentional?

Later in the article he uses "quality blindness" instead, which is probably a better description of most of the issues he talks about.

Dan isn't necessarily Bertrand Russell so ill give him a pass for not using the perfect word in every place.

But this article is in my opinion one of the best attempts at explaining a fundamental problem in software product work that has never (in my experience) been laid out this well. I will implore you to finish it.

Later on he gives an example of Blackboard software that was very disliked. So I don't see what was unique in his perspective either. To me this article is not very focused and feels mostly like rambling. The core idea that we get accustomed to bugs/quality in software we use is sound. Just the article needs streamlining or better a complete rewrite.

> Software that does not meet expectations, especially in a field like search, which is basically a long running war between SEO and search engines, is not a 'bug'.

While bug has various definitions, not meeting reasonable expectations is common to all.

> That's like saying there is 'bug blindness' in the publishing industry because when I pick up a random book, it sucks

No, because there's no reasonable expectation that a random book won"t suck.