https://www.google.com/search?q=pools (browsing in Boston)

Besides search results and their default controls, I see:

- 3 advertisements up top

- 7 business recommendations after the first 3 result s - 8 "searches related to pools" on the bottom

and on the sidebar:

- 6 pool products from walmart

- a map showing where the 7 businesses are located

- 8 ads under that map

Just because some keywords aren't as densely utilized doesn't mean the space is wasted. And if they tried to fill up all available real estate, it dimishes the value of the links they're trying to push.

They didn't allocate it, you did. Most people are not on large screens. First they were uncommon, then just as wide screens became normal, so did small screen handheld devices, like what I'm on right now lying in bed sunday morning.

http://i.imgur.com/s6LSUFR.jpg Much better.

you could ask why does Facebook feel the need to fill every inch of the screen, even when it results in a non-chronological timeline

A Facebook screen is packed with information, which is one reason why it's much more useful than a G+ screen. Both Reddit and HN also pack in a huge amount of information: 30 entries per screen here. Is that bad? Would you rather have just four headlines per screen, like the new Digg?

What else are they to do with it?

You could ask the same question about HN. It's just because the space isn't needed.

Because excessively long lines are hard to read.