Live data from Hacker News

Google is killing infinite scroll on search results

theverge.com

1–10 of 11 posts

Re: Google is killing infinite scroll on search results

#3

(Google is killing search results , downright).-

It's hard to blame them, most of the well monetized expansive web content is deep web, pay walled, brittle, mixed media, copyrighted, and not enabled for something like microtransactions, subject to GDPR, and doesn't make them a dime.

Re: Google is killing infinite scroll on search results

#8

(Google is killing search results , downright).-

It's hard to blame them, most of the well monetized expansive web content is deep web, pay walled, brittle, mixed media, copyrighted, and not enabled for something like microtransactions, subject to GDPR, and doesn't make them a dime.

Exactly — capitalisms goal isn't to create a good service, it is to extract money, hence a good CEO will take a perfectly fine service and maximize revenue by extracting value even if it means the service gets worse.

Now ideally that would mean the service then dies or gets surpassed by competitors, but that mechanism only works if we are not talking about monopolists, that e.g. have the power to make themselves the default on browsers and operating systems.

Re: Google is killing infinite scroll on search results

#9

Well, even though I called out Google is dying a while back, credit where it's due - infinite scroll is one of the worst ux for a list of things.

I strongly feel like infinite scroll was the harbinger of the dark pattern web. It broke the back button. It broke the idea that a list of results could be a static thing. It began the transition from sensible user-friendly ordering of items to algorithmic ordering. It was the first step towards "addictive-UX"

Re: Google is killing infinite scroll on search results

#10
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to blame them, most of the well monetized expansive web content is deep web, pay walled, brittle, mixed media, copyrighted, and not enabled for something like microtransactions, subject to GDPR, and doesn't make them a dime.

Exactly — capitalisms goal isn't to create a good service, it is to extract money, hence a good CEO will take a perfectly fine service and maximize revenue by extracting value even if it means the service gets worse. Now ideally that would mean the service then dies or gets surpassed by competitors, but that mechanism only works if we are not talking about monopolists, that e.g. have the power to make themselves the…

But ... "merit", you know, the (in theory) mechanism by which quality (ie. "non-worse") products gain market share, ergo increasing revenue? (Seriously wondering).-
Post reply on HN