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

Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 254 posts

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#71

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

iambateman wrote: post #63

If the vast majority of Google revenue comes from search, and search is under siege, why is the stock so unfazed? It seems like the market thinks Google will be just fine.

Windows and Office used to make up >90% of Microsoft's revenue, back when Microsoft was the biggest company in the world around DotCom.

Windows especially has been a sinking ship for a decade and yet Microsoft is bigger than ever.

Google is well positioned to monetize LLMs. Cloud, Gemini, and Waymo are all growing and could easily be Fortune 50 companies each within a few years.

Gsuite continues to do well.

Google Search revenue was still growing as of last quarter.

It's possible for Search revenue to still grow while Google Search total market share of search (if including LLM "search") goes down drastically (LLM users search more, not less).

It's also possible that total traditional Google Search volume could decline substantially without a huge impact to Search revenues.

Remember, only about ~15% of searches are Monetized. Google will be focused on keeping THOSE searches going.

It's possible Google could lose TONS of marketshare and still keep the frothiest part of the market...

OpenAI could take off more than any expects and be the biggest company in the world, and it's possible that only takes a small dent out of Search.

It's also possible Google could end up having a significant (if not dominant) part of the LLM search market.

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#72

Post by mlinhares »

chgs wrote: post #69
Baader-Meinhof wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ask two types of questions: 1. Factual updates to an ongoing or recent story. 2. Analysis, e.g. "What were the economic effects of Brexit." Without AI, I would try to read multiple opinions from different sides. But its hard for me to always know which experts to trust? AI will present both sides, but even when AI is not hallucinating, there is still the issue of "are the experts that the AI is sourcing reliable?"

Do you trust an ai run by a shady company but not an attributable human editor.

We’re so cooked, all the thinking outsourced to LLMs.

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#73

Post by tqi »

tehjoker wrote: post #54
rmah wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they help media companies?

There should be a national media company. Instead we have national media companies with no democratic oversight and labor abuse.

You mean like NPR?

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#74

Post by nitwit005 »

chgs wrote: post #68
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this will probably just create a strong incentive to cover important things and move away from clickbait. But clickbait is how they make money... That's like saying, "Oh, Apple will just have to move away from selling the iPhone and start selling hamburgers instead." I mean, sure, but they're not going to like it, and it's going to come with a lot of lost revenue and profits. I find myself regularly copying…

Those adverts and clickbait will infect llms soon enough, just be far harder to block.

Yes, unfortunately for those saying AIs will only get better, advertising is a major reason we should expect them to get worse.

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#75

Post by Baader-Meinhof »

chgs wrote: post #69
Baader-Meinhof wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ask two types of questions: 1. Factual updates to an ongoing or recent story. 2. Analysis, e.g. "What were the economic effects of Brexit." Without AI, I would try to read multiple opinions from different sides. But its hard for me to always know which experts to trust? AI will present both sides, but even when AI is not hallucinating, there is still the issue of "are the experts that the AI is sourcing reliable?"

Do you trust an ai run by a shady company but not an attributable human editor.

I think you have an outdated understanding of AI workflow. They generally cite their sources, which you should check, just like regular search.

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#76

Post by rozap »

chgs wrote: post #69
Baader-Meinhof wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ask two types of questions: 1. Factual updates to an ongoing or recent story. 2. Analysis, e.g. "What were the economic effects of Brexit." Without AI, I would try to read multiple opinions from different sides. But its hard for me to always know which experts to trust? AI will present both sides, but even when AI is not hallucinating, there is still the issue of "are the experts that the AI is sourcing reliable?"

Do you trust an ai run by a shady company but not an attributable human editor.

Yes, the AI is trained on a vast quantity of data therefore it is less likely to be manipulated vs a single editor that may have ulterior motives. Therefore it's much harder to manipulate. A corporation which represents many shareholders' interest has its own reputation on the line, which would be seriously damaged if they were caught doing anything like you suggest.

But this can only be understood within the context of the white genocide currently happening in South Africa. Some are saying it's not real, but there have been documented attacks on farms and chants of "kill the boer".

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#77

Post by coffeefirst »

aucisson_masque wrote: post #42

Well I didn’t expect some good coming from the ai revolution and yet. If it helps to annihilate the « news » sites that depended over advertisement to be profitable, that’s great. Advertisement and journalism should never have been in the same sentence, no one can provide full independent news when you’re at the mercy of advertiser threatening to bail out if you say something bad on them.

There are two choices here:

1. Create an elite only product that’s way too expensive for the general public.

2. Subsidize the costs of the newsroom with some form of advertising. There’s several of different forms that can take.

That’s the trade off. You can make it but there really is a need for ad supported reporting.

For what it’s worth I’ve been in this business 15 years and can’t name a single incident of your influence scenario. I can’t speak to every outlet in the world but this is not a thing that happens.

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#78

Post by teeray »

rmah wrote: post #11
Tarsul wrote: post #6

Anyone surprised? I mean that's just what Google does and did from the very early days. I am more ashamed that politicians worldwide have done basically nothing to help media companies in the last 25 years. We can always ask ourselves: What is more important for our society: independent media or our search overlords?

Why should they help media companies?

Because an informed public helps the proper functioning of a democracy (I know, I know, it’s a hilarious thing to say in the US)

Re: Chatbots are replacing Google's search, devastating traffic for some publishers

#79

Post by amarant »

Honestly, it's at least partially on the publishers in this case.

I've started using AI to summarise articles for me because the endless SEO fluff has gotten to completely unbearable levels.

If you publish an article with a sidetrack that's 8 pages long and completely irrelevant, don't get upset when I have some LLM summarize it to 3 bullet points instead. I'm not made of time, nor patience!

Post reply on HN