Aardvark: the know-it-all friend

Thanks to the brains behind today's search algorithms, searching for things we know is incredibly easy. It's what we don't know that is difficult to find.

A good example of such a search is troubleshooting computers. From basic spreadsheet problems, to complicated server load and infrastructure issues, it's all  answered online. Most quests for a solution end up at a discussion board or support forum where users gather to find and give answers. So why search to find the dialogue? Why not establish it from the beginning?

Enter Aardvark. It's a peer question answering service. You interact with this service by talking to it via chat (such as Google Chat).

Interface

The chat interface is fantastic. It avoids all the pitfalls of its predecessors (command line interfaces, text adventure games), which where too complicated to learn for the average user and had little useful feedback. Aardvark is simple, and relatively linear. There are two starting points: ask or answer.  This makes it very easy to guide the user along, and Aardvark does a good job. Its writing voice is a great mix of friendliness, expediency without any smugness.

Issues
While the streamlined interaction and novel user experience are to Aardvark's advantage, they can be its Achilles' heel, causing two issues:

1. People are the weakest link. Thoughtless answers caused by careless reading of the question are commonplace. Which begs the questions: is a one query search the best solution? Can immediate answers be any use?
2. It's a two person bubble. Sometimes it's just you and the person answering. Others can chime in, but it's still a small group. The advantage of a Google result path is that many have seen it, which makes it a bit more reliable.

Conclusion
The unreliable quality in responses is made up by Aardvarks speed and ease of use and ubiquity. In certain cases it's an appropriate channel to try, and it does have the potential to be the fastest ticket to real nuggets of information.