Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 462 posts

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#431

Post by moron4hire »

dorgo wrote: post #429
moron4hire wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are to believe advertisers are so great at their jobs, why can't they produce any meaningful metrics that don't commit egregious sins of statistical analysis? Here's a thing that I am absolutely convinced happens. Ad network tracks purchases. Ad network track ad impressions. Ad network correlates the two and finds that 90% of people who saw the ad also bought the product. But they conveniently "forgot" to check…

If 1 out of 100 impressions leads to a purchase it's alredy a good performance. The effort to improve this rate is not always worth it. That's the reason we are spammed with ads.

I'm not convinced even 1 out of 100 is happening. If advertising is having an impact, it would be measurable. If it's not measurable, there's no impact.

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#432

Post by freediver »

Closi wrote: post #414
freediver wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a few notes. Search costs money and it seems we needed to get to 2022 to realize that. We made a choice of user = customer so yes the cost is real, and it is suddenly on the user. What they get in return is (at least a promise of) a superior search experience with a product that has many features that Google and similar ad-supported search engines simply never can. Our $10 plan is likely going to give the user 1…

> 80% of users search less than that monthly, even average HN users (who are majority of our beta users). I suspect 80% of your users also are not daily-driving though, are also using other search engines at the same time, and have not set Kagi as a default on all their computers and their mobile devices (which I did!). In order to do that I had to change my mobile browser from Safari to Firefox, which is part of the…

> I think the problem is a monetization strategy is only valid if people are willing to pay for it.

There are people willing to pay for it, the question is will there be enough. A doomed monetization strategy would be one where people are willing to pay for it, but you lose money on every transaction.

> 1000 sounds like a lot more than 33 a day - particularly when if it is a search with a lens applied that drops to c16 per day, or a search that then clicks through to images.

Not sure where you got this from. Search via lens does not cost as 2 searches. It is costing 1 search and we are making changes in the future where it will count as less than 1 search.

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#433

Post by freediver »

Closi wrote: post #427
b112 wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how the paid search API of Google and Bing work, but I will say one thing here. When I'm searching for technical data, I often search, and click through to more than one thing. I also tend to modify search terms, too, trying to winnow the results a bit. My point being, there is a lot of potential for "show the same search results again, because the user re-searched 5 minutes later" and "show the same sea…

Completely agree with almost everything you have said, but to clarify on your caching point: > But, even though it adds local cost for storage and DB, caching searches per user could reduce costs in some scenarios There may be some opportunity to do this, and caching results would be a good idea, but most forms of caching are explicitly banned from the Google and Bing API T&Cs. Some caching is allowed in some circums…

> Agree with this - and at your usage levels plus $1 per 80 searches plus the $10 fee for 30 / day, you will be talking about $40+ per month, or $480 per year - enough to buy a new Macbook every 2.5 years :)

The proposed pay per use is an independent tier, not on top of any other.

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#434

Post by Closi »

freediver wrote: post #433
Closi wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree with almost everything you have said, but to clarify on your caching point: > But, even though it adds local cost for storage and DB, caching searches per user could reduce costs in some scenarios There may be some opportunity to do this, and caching results would be a good idea, but most forms of caching are explicitly banned from the Google and Bing API T&Cs. Some caching is allowed in some circums…

> Agree with this - and at your usage levels plus $1 per 80 searches plus the $10 fee for 30 / day, you will be talking about $40+ per month, or $480 per year - enough to buy a new Macbook every 2.5 years :) The proposed pay per use is an independent tier, not on top of any other.

> The proposed pay per use is an independent tier, not on top of any other.

Pay per use is on all tiers if you go above the quota, the quota just changes based on tier. It’s been made pretty clear on discord that none of the tiers will be ‘all you can eat’.

A bottom PAYG tier is different to what I last heard although it doesn’t actually change the monthly cost of $40 for OP though.

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#435

Post by freediver »

Closi wrote: post #434
freediver wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agree with this - and at your usage levels plus $1 per 80 searches plus the $10 fee for 30 / day, you will be talking about $40+ per month, or $480 per year - enough to buy a new Macbook every 2.5 years :) The proposed pay per use is an independent tier, not on top of any other.

> The proposed pay per use is an independent tier, not on top of any other. Pay per use is on all tiers if you go above the quota, the quota just changes based on tier. It’s been made pretty clear on discord that none of the tiers will be ‘all you can eat’. A bottom PAYG tier is different to what I last heard although it doesn’t actually change the monthly cost of $40 for OP though.

Yes, pretty much everything is still open regarding pricing, and we are having a public discussion about it.

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#437

Post by pyb »

RosanaAnaDana wrote: post #298

I'm just gonna throw this out there as I'm noticing it more and more at this point since switching languages. What the actual F has happened to google search results for programming issues? I used to be able to google a question and get, more or less, a right answer from a forum or stack overflow. Recently, many coding tutorial websites have clearly figured out how to hack googles pageranks and now instead of one 'ri…

Agreed, the most vexing thing about this is that DDG is now promoting the exact same tutorial sites that Google is : Geekforgeeks, etc

What's the point in having different search engines if they copy each other's search results?

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#438

Post by stevenicr »

hda111 wrote: post #418
gambiting wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google results have for a while stopped having anything to do with the actual search query. In the past they were magical, like Google could almost read your mind and guess exactly what you mean, but nowadays you can type in the exact search string, and still have the first page of results where Google just ommited half of the string to give you sponsored content. Like even for simple "C# " why are the first few resu…

Seems like the SEO people have successfully reverse engineered Google‘s algorithms.

I must disagree with this notion.

For one, google now encourages and helps SEO - it's no longer a taboo term that leads to lifetime blacklisting - so google is publicly explaining and apologizing sometimes to SEO's (and others who listen/watch/read john mueller and co)

secondly in reference to the bad results and SEOs ruined google - um no. Google ruined google. Google went to war against SEO and disappeared much of the good on the web as collateral damage.

Google also got creative with ranking things based on things that push youtube up and other google properties for many results - as well as news type publications - which means for many queries it's now pay to play - pay adwords to rank 1st page or lose 90%+ visibility. And many good sites can't afford to pay per click to be on the first page.

Google is giving you results it wants you to think are 'good' - which has been pushing many of the results we actually want far and away. (Which interestingly sends more traffic to google properties adding to their value, and forces other to pay for adwords or not be seen by most in the world)

in my humble, and yet biased, and not very broadly researched (fairly focused), opinion.

Re: For some searches the whole screen on Google is now ads

#440

Post by majani »

omot wrote: post #343

I call this the squeeze. Google, even after all its attempts, is still a one trick pony. They have to grow at least 20% year over year to justify the market cap. They weren’t able to create a two pillar company like Amazon (AWS + Retail) so what do uncreative master executives naturally turn to? Of course their only cash cow. “ Rabban! I place you in charge of Arrakis. It's yours to squeeze, as I promised. I want you…

Surely GDN and Play Store are generating billions in profit?
Post reply on HN