Agreed. It leaves no room for debate or for understanding the assumptions involved.

Also, while many items in the list are insightful, I find what bothers me in this and similar lists is when you could swap anything for "search" (or "time", "addresses" or whatever the other lists happen to mention).

See for example, replacing "search" with an X:

  - Choosing the correct X is easy and you will always be happy with your decision

  - Once setup, X will work the same way forever

  - Once setup, X will work the same way for a while

  - Once setup, X will work the same way for the next week

  - The default X settings will deliver a good X experience

The problem with these assertions is that, while cute, they are so broad and generic they tell us almost nothing about the specific problem of search engines. For almost every decision in software design and implementation, the above assertions hold true.

Quite true!

Or even enough context to interpret:

> Search can be considered an additional feature just like any other

Is that a falsehood? - what does it even mean?

Almost nothing. I guarantee that for any non-trivial feature, you could just say:

"<non-trivial feature F> can be considered an additional feature just like any other"

And everyone will agree that's probably false. They could have written "search is almost never a trivial feature, and you should take your time to consider complications", but I suppose that wouldn't sound as a cute as a "Falsehoods Programmers Believe" list.