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

Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

demandsphere.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 169 posts

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#131

Post by hammyhavoc »

com2kid wrote: post #126
hammyhavoc wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you discovered free energy then you and your family are probably getting whacked rather than disrupt the billionaire-class who depend on scarcity, artificial or otherwise.

Governments have basically subsidized energy so that it is as close as possible to free for generations now. Tons of industrial processes rely on super cheap energy, one reason China has such a powerful steel industry is because of how cheap energy is over there. Energy is one of many inputs into industrial systems, and it is a fairly commoditized one at that. Free energy doesn't mean you don't need tons of infrastru…

Whilst I don't disagree with a lot of the points you're making (they're great):

ExxonMobil's operating revenue is $413.7bn USD. I'll be surprised if someone isn't getting whacked if they let the free energy genie out of the bottle.

Energy isn't cheap in the UK. Far from it. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/electric-...

My family lived in South Africa post-WWII because my gruncle's skin grafts wouldn't take in the UK climate. The Kariba dam gave free electricity to the surrounding area, the idea that this was something people paid for elsewhere just blew the minds of everybody there. Free energy is not a new thing.

However, politics and socioeconomics play a big part in whether or not a country can make successful use of energy, but the possibility of something being possible doesn't mean it'll happen. Furthermore, today, water reserves are a problem for the dam, and power generation was being suspended late last year due to it.

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#132

Post by javajosh »

Brajeshwar wrote: post #120
rpastuszak wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

B…but I’ve just started my (medieval) content farm. https://tidings.potato.horse/about

Awesome. I'm today years old stumbling on the existence of a `.horse` TLD. What else are there -- wacky, fun, and interesting TLDs?

jart's url is cool https://justine.lol

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#134

Post by motoxpro »

prepend wrote: post #106
Alupis wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't helping people, though, you're helping a for-profit company earn billions of dollars off your, and other's good will and knowledge. The for-profit company is helping people, in exchange for direct and/or indirect monetization. Your blog post's knowledge-dump ends up never being seen. This is why StackOverflow reacted so poorly to Stack Exchange's announcement they would be using all of your hard work to tr…

> You aren't helping people, though, you're helping a for-profit company earn billions of dollars off your, and other's good will and knowledge. This has all been played out before. I’m cool helping companies along with people. Imagine you discover free energy. Would you not give it away because you don’t want billion dollar companies to benefit? I have a choice to give away info or keep it. Id rather give it away th…

very eloquently put

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#135

Post by chrisbolt »

crazygringo wrote: post #31
jacooper wrote: post #5

The issue is getting people to click on your website, why would any one do that if the entire content is already extracted by the ai, which directly gave it to the user?

Because an article isn't a snippet? People who just want a basic factual answer to a question won't go to your site, they'll use Google's snippet as they already do now in many cases. But people who want to read your whole article will continue to go to your site. This seems entirely reasonable to me. I shouldn't have to visit a webpage to discover when Abraham Lincoln was born, but I should if I want to read a short…

Why? Lincoln's birth date and his bio are both things that could be figured out by anyone with a few minutes of time.

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#136

Post by dragonwriter »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #24
brookst wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that the motive for posting a bread recipe that starts with 5000 words about the history of bread will evaporate, so we'll be left with websites from enthusiasts who have something interesting to say?

maybe… but will an ai search even tell you those sites exist?

If it is designed and prompted to be able to reference sites rather than just give freestanding “answers” with no context, yes.

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#137

Post by nologic01 »

Keywords (tokens) are the very basis for LLM but they no longer need to be spoonfed or gamed, they are extracted from the text, so in an objective and naive sense the content becomes ever more of a king.

Ofcourse what the search decides to surface to the user and eventually link to is another story altogether. "Learning" from one site and promoting another more lucrative one is entirely possible, if somewhat evil.

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#138

Post by swores »

edmundsauto wrote: post #96
Alupis wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But for someone who wants to increase the knowledge in the world, it's not so bad... You may actually be decreasing the knowledge of the world. It's not difficult to imagine a future where people do not know how to effectively communicate, and instead rely on ChatGPT (or whatever) to communicate for them. Or a future where nobody knows anything, and instead blindly trusts the output of AI models. There's already da…

How does your example (bots chatting with bots on dating sites) decrease knowledge? I can see that it dilutes knowledge, but overall isn't the size of the pie decreased?

Isn't it possible for knowledge to be effectively different based on how much incorrect stuff there is?

For example if one person knows two correct facts about a specific sport, and another person knows those same 2 correct facts as well as 2 false facts, and doesn't know which 2 are true or false, isn't the second person less knowledgeable about that sport than the first person, despite technically having the same amount of true facts on the subject?

Equally, even if the amount of known knowledge in the world remains the same, isn't a world in which every human while studying spends every minute learning true stuff vs. spending half their time reading made up stuff, won't people on average be less knowledgeable despite the fact that no global knowledge got destroyed in the process? (Ofc there's never been a time when it's possible to spend 100% of the time learning completely accurate stuff, hypothetical exaggeration there.)

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#139

Post by swores »

ipaddr wrote: post #88
brookst wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are viewers the only way to make a living? It wasn't always that way.

It was always this way. If no one buys your paper you shutdown writers have no jobs and stop writing. If no one buys your book same deal. What era are you referring to?

Well there were eras before mass publication when some people still wrote, about science or history or whatever, either because they were funded by their religion or by personal money or by a rich benefactor. Of course it was a tiny % of people doing that, but then again it was only a tiny % who could learn to read and write or afford to spend time on hobbies.

Re: Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI

#140

Post by twelve40 »

8note wrote: post #76
Alupis wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't helping people, though, you're helping a for-profit company earn billions of dollars off your, and other's good will and knowledge. The for-profit company is helping people, in exchange for direct and/or indirect monetization. Your blog post's knowledge-dump ends up never being seen. This is why StackOverflow reacted so poorly to Stack Exchange's announcement they would be using all of your hard work to tr…

Sure you're helping people. The ai gets trained and thens tells people the stuff you learned The billion dollar company was already profiting off that goodwill by putting ads beside people looking for it As far as the blog is self advertising for your resume or company, it's just as good since you're linking it directly. Maybe even better since the ai will have opinions about you

> Maybe even better since the ai will have opinions about you

what does that even mean?? and how in the world is it better than receiving direct visitors from Google as a reward for posting??

Post reply on HN