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

Google changes its search box

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 961 posts

Re: Google changes its search box

#291

Post by victorbjorklund »

victor106 wrote: post #199
Andrex wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speculation: I could see a future where Google populates a footer on results with the website logos of the sources. Presumably, the new web will require users to memorize websites/brands and go directly to those sites if they see a lot of their results are being provided by one source. Websites may go back to being simply labors of love.

>I could see a future where Google populates a footer on results with the website logos of the sources. ChatGPT/Claude does this today. I barely click or care for the source when they already have me the info I wanted. My speculation is all information worth anything is going to be behind some kind of wall.

I click those all the time if it is something that matters and I wanna verify that the AI got it correctly.

Re: Google changes its search box

#292

Post by baaron »

Yokohiii wrote: post #238
imoverclocked wrote: post #37

I don't trust facts from LLMs. When I am searching for something, I usually want to find primary sources. As soon as a number is involved, I do my best to not even look at the AI output. Even though the result is often good and combines information from multiple sources, it can also get things wrong by combining information from different eras or just plain outdated advice. AFAICT, without primary sources, the result…

Even before the AI era I slowly became less and less successful with google searches. Everything - non trivial / specific - that I looked for turned into a chore and I quickly gave up. LLMs, that can supply valid links, give me a completely different variety of results. Either I am too dumb to search manually, too impatient or google search is just broken, but Gemini usually gives me something I can work with. I just…

Checkout Kagi. You can blacklist sites. You can also weight certain sites higher than others. I've been using it for almost a year at this point. When I'm forced to use Google at work, I am legitimately less effective at finding the information I need.

Re: Google changes its search box

#293

Post by vb-8448 »

drcongo wrote: post #236
pflenker wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A couple of years back I worked with a company which maintained specific data which was the main traffic driver on that page. Google approached them and wanted to pay for the rights to get the data and display it on top of the search results, a feature which was fairly new back then. This was an interesting dilemma because it was very clear that the money was way less than the loss in ad revenue due to traffic drop,…

"Nice data you got there, it'd be a shame if something were to happen to it"

The fact is that internet is already "tech giants own realm": the power is way beyond public imagination and affects all of us in real life on daily bases, but there are still people thinking they are not the "evil one" here.

Re: Google changes its search box

#294

Post by thelastgallon »

pflenker wrote: post #110
ekidd wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which as some running a website raises a fascinating question. If Google is just going to crawl my sites and present information as an AI summary on their site, then what exactly do I gain by allowing Googlebot to crawl my sites?

A couple of years back I worked with a company which maintained specific data which was the main traffic driver on that page. Google approached them and wanted to pay for the rights to get the data and display it on top of the search results, a feature which was fairly new back then. This was an interesting dilemma because it was very clear that the money was way less than the loss in ad revenue due to traffic drop,…

This reminds me of Walmarts squeezing strategy with all the manufacturers. Business with us at the price we say or out of business.

Re: Google changes its search box

#295

Post by lunar_mycroft »

jrmg wrote: post #141
lunar_mycroft wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I have to read the sources anyway, why not just have the model give me the links themselves? You know, like search engines already do?

Search engines don’t do that any more - they just give you a bunch of SEO spam sites, now mostly filled with plausible slop. Answers from search are _less_ reliable than answers from an LLM now. I worry that the LLMs are just the equivalent of a ‘lagging indicator’ of web quality though - that they will also soon be overwhelmed with the sheer volume of plausible nonsense that is the web now, just like search engines…

If the LLM is capable of providing good citations, then those citations could be returned in the same format as traditional search engines, not the new, LLM generated content first format. If they aren't capable of providing good citations, then the suggestion I was replying to is incorrect (and you'd have no way of knowing if they were right or not)

Re: Google changes its search box

#296

Post by luggage_bazooka »

SoftTalker wrote: post #115
pclowes wrote: post #22

I understand why they are doing this. My Google search usage is easily down 50%+. I doubt I am unique here. While there are times where I want pure search (Kagi, Old Google) I mostly use LLMs to search now and have them provide me links for source data. When I do use LLMs as a search engine I always want it integrated into my AI workflows with access to tools and scripts etc. I never want to have a conversation with…

"I never want to have a conversation with a website that is geared towards advertising me products." Since this is how Google makes all their money, why are they killing it off? Do they think people will eventually pay for LLM search? Do they plan to stuff the results with ads, not even sharing the ad revenue with the content sources?

Because they will still try to pump ads via AdSense. That's why I've created a platform called Zero Ad Network, where developers can monetize their sites by NOT showing ads and get paid by the platform subscribers.

Re: Google changes its search box

#298

Post by bigstrat2003 »

BobbyTables2 wrote: post #70
ivraatiems wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not at all in the same boat as you; I do not and likely will never primarily rely on LLMs for information. But it's fascinating to hear that even folks who do don't find this approach useful.

For me, Google search results have gotten so poor (and other engines aren’t any better), that I’d rather just ask an online LLM for what I’m looking for. I was once very good at advanced Google search queries but they seem to no longer respect such queries - either showing irrelevant results or none at all (that should exist). I don’t love LLMs, but they seem to not make up stuff very often these days and usually cit…

> Google search results have gotten so poor (and other engines aren’t any better...

Ah, but they are! Kagi is light years better than Google, and is a worthy replacement. You do have to pay for it, but I get my money's worth.

Re: Google changes its search box

#299

Post by data-ottawa »

ivraatiems wrote: post #4

Kind of Google to create a market opening for its competitors like this. I hope Kagi, Bing, and DuckDuckGo are taking notes.

reCaptcha is a pretty strong wall to allow only Google to index websites, especially now that you need device verification. Throw in Cloudflare too.

There’s not much room to squeeze in when your competitors hold the keys to 15 million top websites.

Post reply on HN