Live data from Hacker News

The next Google

dkb.io

171–180 of 561 posts

Re: The next Google

#171

The future search engine will look for content that is produced by humans . We don't need more info for the sake of having info. we need info that we can assume has been produced by an actual sentient being.

Since it's difficult to determine whether a human produced a particular piece of content, a good alternative would be to determine whether there's any incentive for a bot to produce such content, and target that instead. Ads, analytics, affiliate links, etc.

Sure, you could still make a bot that auto-generates blogspam without the aforementioned things and rank as high as before, but what's the point if you removed the very things that get you paid?

There's plenty of things out there that are trivially spammable but outside of isolated cases (where the objective is to cause damage/annoyance rather than profit) nobody is spamming them because there's no profit to be made by doing so.

Re: The next Google

#172
> The next Google can’t just be an input box that spits out links.

Hard disagree. I spent years of my life working on a "new way to search" (Graph Search at Facebook, ~2012) and the biggest takeaways for me from all of that time is:

1) people don't want to learn a new way to search, and they don't want to learn new tools, filters, lenses, whatever you want to call it. it must be a keyword-search based input because Google has trained billions to search (and to think) this way for 20+ years now. imo the next google shouldn't fight this behavior, but rather adopt it as part of the core strategy

2) ownership of the "search intent entrypoint" is key. people generally don't care what they are using to search, as long as it's easy and fast to use and actually works. google understands this and makes it almost impossible to bypass searching with google if you're on an Android phone. All of these alternative search engines have a huge barrier to entry not only on the technology and data side, but mainly on the entrypoint side. They can't reasonably expect hundreds of millions of the people to go through and manually update their default search engine on all of their devices. What about when I go to use Google Assistant? Google maps? All entrypoints that Google has used to lock up search intent. It's brilliant. I believe there are moves still available for a future Google assailant to overcome these barriers, but I haven't seen many that have directly touched on this point yet. new technical shifts may open up new entrypoints here (VR/AR?)

3) the search engine that has the lowest time between [query] -> [answer] for a user wins. any search engine that adds additional cruft through forcing more clicks, usage of advanced tooling (filters, lenses, etc), visualizations, etc will lose out because they are getting farther and farther from the core problem a user has - "find me x". this is the thing that is driving the hero/knowledge units on Google, further cementing their leadership

4) the one brightspot - verticalized search intent is a huge area of untapped potential in the search arena. Google is great at general search (and honestly also at a huge number of verticals that it's developed over time), but there are many verticals that google honestly sucks at. I do believe there is a potential entrypoint here for a "new google" if they can take on a vertical-by-vertical expansion strategy. Owning the intent entrypoint would still be as important as ever, but this play would look a lot like the early Yelp vertical expansion strategy from the early 2000s. It's anybody's guess what the actual right starting vertical and entrypoint match is though

tl;dr Google won't go down easy, and a Google killer may actually look incredibly similar to Google in it's end-state

Re: The next Google

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's an LMM?

Sorry, a typo of LLM. gpt-3 et al.

Oh AI is the future of search? Maybe.

I think the bigger reason why search isn’t getting much better is that incremental technical improvements are being offset by Google trading their dominance for greater shareholder value. A safe business can take away or buy-and-bury features that are better for the customer but worse for the business’s top line. Things like the Power Search API, or search that integrates with other platforms that hurt Alphabet owned businesses.

Traditionally big innovation breaks some socio-political constraint on market participation. I don’t see how AI will do that yet.

Re: The next Google

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The death of the web is because most people don't want what you want. They don't mind walled gardens, so long as they are easy to use and have the content and connections that they want to see. The audience of HN is extremely skewed towards preferring systems that allow tinkering but that's not what the market wants.

People don't mind walled gardens because for a while they've been good enough if not better than the previous status-quo. However, those walled gardens are decaying such that there might actually be demand for something better if it existed.

Or there just may be demand for walled gardens that are better kept

Re: The next Google

#175
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiktok didn't dominate by appealing to niche tech power users.

TikTok's purpose and use-case is completely different from that of a search engine.

Tech power users are still a niche in virtually every use case except maybe HN

Re: The next Google

#176
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find reddit works remarkably well for this. I've gotten great actionable recommendations within an hour or two for: - good coffeeshops - tacos - Korean grocery stores - places that have traditional style al pastor tacos - finding a specific coffee brand at a local grocery store - finding EDM songs similar to a particular song (dullscythe) - hot chicken - canolis and a bunch more similar things. I would think if you…

This tends to work for me as well but signal vs noise ratio has worsened over time. Despite Reddit's questionable decisions in the past years it still has useful information for all sorts of things. Reddit's own search has become less reliable so I search via DDG like ` 'site:reddit.com'`, falling back to `!g 'site:reddit.com'` if the former doesn't get me anywhere.

> Reddit's own search has become less reliable

Not sure what you mean... It's always been an absolute pile of shit

Re: The next Google

#177
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4. How about an image search that... actually returns the URL of the raw image? Here's a dead simple use case that is just unnecessarily frustrating. As a user, I want a high res picture of a buffalo. So: a. I do an image search for "buffalo" and the results page contains thumbnails of buffalos. b. I click the first result, it's tagged with "nationalgeographic.com" so it's probably gonna be good. Instead of the image…

Yes, everyone likes content better when they don't have to pay for it, all else equal. But content IP owners don't want to make content for free.

Well, in the age of "creators" I'm sure there are countless of people who would be willing to post pictures of buffalo "for free" if they believed they had a chance of having their work actually make it to the top of the search results

Re: The next Google

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TikTok's purpose and use-case is completely different from that of a search engine.

Tech power users are still a niche in virtually every use case except maybe HN

Tech power users (and power users in general I would say) might have more money to throw at the problem. "Nicheness" isn't necessarily a bad thing if your niche is profitable. I heard somewhere that power-grid-scale transformers are have insanely long lead times so the industry most be pretty niche (when's the last time you needed one of those?) and yet I think we can all agree that the equipment is valuable and I bet those manufacturers are making bank.

Re: The next Google

#179
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know your comment is tongue-in-cheek but I happily pay for Youtube premium and it's truly an amazing experience compared to the ad-ridden non-usable free Youtube. If Google created a similar Google premium where it had such features and no pesky ads I'd pay for it in a heartbeat.

yeah, but then your just encouraging them to make the free version a bad as is acceptable, like YouTube, and possibility create classes like on commercial airlines. you want the world divided into classes?

The world is already divided between "free" and "paid", so I'm not sure what you're getting at here

Re: The next Google

#180
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do think there's actually some space opening up for paid services. From what I'm seeing, if you could create a bot free eco system, people will pay for it. The question is "can you make it bot free". This is gonna be the next trillion dollar company.

Raising the cost of spam would be a good first step. At the moment, spamming Google seems to be trivial with no long-term penalties if you get caught doing something nasty. A simple rule (manually enforced on a case-by-case basis) that would ban your brand/domain for a year if you get caught breaking the rules would get Pinterest into compliance from day 1 for example. Using ads/analytics/affiliate links as a negativ…

This would be easily exploitable by a competitor. For example, search engines (used to) rank back links - that is other domains pointing to your domain. Some bad actors took advantage of this by creating rings of sites that voted each other up. Google responded by punishing the behavior. Then, competitors started taking advantage of this punishment by creating a network of sites that backlinked to a competitor, so they would get punished instead.

This isn’t a hypothetical example - Google actually includes in their webmaster tools a “disavow links” capability so sites can avoid getting punished for bad actors trying to make them look bad. But you can imagine if the penalties were even more severe other folks may get caught up in an unforgiving dragnet with no judge or jury and no way to appeal.

My main point is that people will find ways to game the system, and usually sharp edges (“harsh punishments”) on any system will be taken advantage of by actors, and unfairly penalize others.

Post reply on HN