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

The man who killed Google Search?

wheresyoured.at

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 939 posts

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#141

Post by rrrix1 »

autokad wrote: post #119
rrrix1 wrote: post #104

It's April 23rd, 2024, and I am still looking for a good, reliable, honest and simple search engine. All I want to do is search. No AI. No ads. No shopping. Please don't "Answer my question." I enjoy doing my own original research, thanks. I'm entirely willing - wanting even - to pay for it. Currently Kagi has my $, but I'm saddened and frustrated that they're not even focused on Search, they're focused on AI[1] and…

honestly, 99% of the time I don't need search. I want AI. I don't want to have to use a weird syntax to 'talk to a search engine'. sometimes I don't even know what the word is that I am searching for. I want something I can just ... talk to. I use to use search every day, now I use it about once a month.

Indeed, AI is immensely useful! I use it every day too.

However, it's been my experience that finding original works, perhaps that I can cite as a source, is somewhat difficult when the computer might confabulate both the content and the citations.

When LLMs get (much) better at doing math, law and medicine, I'll be much more likely to use them for those things.

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#142

Post by [deleted] »

autokad wrote: post #119
rrrix1 wrote: post #104

It's April 23rd, 2024, and I am still looking for a good, reliable, honest and simple search engine. All I want to do is search. No AI. No ads. No shopping. Please don't "Answer my question." I enjoy doing my own original research, thanks. I'm entirely willing - wanting even - to pay for it. Currently Kagi has my $, but I'm saddened and frustrated that they're not even focused on Search, they're focused on AI[1] and…

honestly, 99% of the time I don't need search. I want AI. I don't want to have to use a weird syntax to 'talk to a search engine'. sometimes I don't even know what the word is that I am searching for. I want something I can just ... talk to. I use to use search every day, now I use it about once a month.

[deleted]

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#143

Post by arromatic »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #114
itronitron wrote: post #89

I switched over to DDG sometime in 2017 or 2018, haven't used Google Search since.

I try. I swear to god I try. Then the DDG search results come up, and they're just dumb. It's like they trained some dog to bring the search results. If it were a dog coming up with them, you would be amazed and rightly so. The dog reads, it vaguely understands the topic you're looking for. It can sort of find something related to it, but not really relevant. But look, it's actually a god doing it. Woohoo. Of course,…

You explained DDG really well.DDG has so much potential to innovate with a sufficiently large user base and popularity .

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#146

Post by 1980phipsi »

rrrix1 wrote: post #104

It's April 23rd, 2024, and I am still looking for a good, reliable, honest and simple search engine. All I want to do is search. No AI. No ads. No shopping. Please don't "Answer my question." I enjoy doing my own original research, thanks. I'm entirely willing - wanting even - to pay for it. Currently Kagi has my $, but I'm saddened and frustrated that they're not even focused on Search, they're focused on AI[1] and…

Here's my requirement: if I'm using a VPN, don't constantly ask me to do CAPTCHA.

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#147

Post by jrflowers »

romanhn wrote: post #136
Nevermark wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hyperbole that is quite obviously hyperbole is a well accepted literary device. It is a form of highlight via creative exaggeration of non-critical points, that is transparent, not deceptive, in service of making serious adjacent points. [0] The point here is to highlight the actually cartoonish level of dysfunction and damage with an intentionally cartoonish flourish. The "villian" in this case can be colorfully int…

Hyperbole is well and good in fiction and personal opinion pieces. I suppose my, and parent commenter's issue, is that we expected a certain type of writing, but got another. And that's fine. I don't have a dog in this fight, but to me it went beyond hyperbole and into personal attack territory. I called it juvenile because the descriptors lack nuance in the same way that "management bad, programmer good" arguments d…

> people mocked without having full context

This is a good point. This 3700 word article titled “The Man Who Killed Google Search” about Prabhakar Raghavan does not contain context for why the author would dislike Prabhakar Raghavan or speak ill of him professionally.

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#148

Post by arromatic »

vgeek wrote: post #100
skilled wrote: post #7

Google is doing something similar now[0], both from a searchers and a site owners perspective. Barry Schwartz regularly posts Google updates on his site[1], for over a decade no less. Since August 2023, those updates have been reaching the 500 mean comment range with many updates reaching 700-900 comment range. And this has been happening for 8 straight months! People have been robbed of their livelihoods and many ha…

I also follow SERoundtable (I have worked as SEO/digital marketer/developer for roughly 20 years), but tend to discount many of the comments due to the assumption that many of the people complaining in broken English may not actually have the quality of site that they believe they do, but there are tons of good sites getting caught up in updates-- not just now, but in every update. The past ~2-3 years have had entire…

So everyone should start making html only site like danluu or pre -2000 ?

Re: The man who killed Google Search?

#149

Post by rrrix1 »

chankstein38 wrote: post #49
OnionBlender wrote: post #31

I'm so sick of search systems ignoring or changing my search string. LinkedIn is especially bad for this. If I search for "OpenGL", many of the results don't contain the one word I searched for. Many of the results are "promoted" jobs from Microsoft that have nothing to do with graphics. On Apple’s job site, it will include OpenCL jobs in addition to OpenGL. It is probably more efficient for my time and sanity to cre…

I agree. Fuzzy searches are a bane of my existence. Like trying to search amazon for any specific detail about a product. All you get are basically the same promoted crap from a non-specific search. I just want my results.

It would be nice to have some generic/universally accepted syntax for fuzzy/non-fuzzy(?) search behavior.

e.g. something like "exact match for this string" and ~(similar or fuzzy match for this string)

Post reply on HN