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

311–320 of 961 posts

Re: Google changes its search box

#311

Post by burnte »

thelastgallon wrote: post #294
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,…

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

Yep, this is exactly why some companies simply don't work with Walmart.

Re: Google changes its search box

#312

Post by latexr »

fscaramuzza wrote: post #290

What scares me about this new AI mode thingy is that every answer sounds like a systematic literature review, but only for the results. For example, if I look for users feedback about a specific product, it says "People think that..., but also that...; It's important to notice that some people ..." where with 'people' it means just a random comment on a random website just because it thought it was a good contributio…

> "People think that..., but also that...; It's important to notice that some people ..." where with 'people' it means just a random comment on a random website

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word

Re: Google changes its search box

#313

Post by ahmadyan »

sonofhans wrote: post #155
BobbyTables2 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Kagi is better. Kagi is damn good, as much a revelation as the Google of old. Not free, though.

Google is still very good, just get rid of evil stuff on their homepage to get the old google.

https://www.google.com/search?&udm=web&q=hackernews

Re: Google changes its search box

#314

Post by frenchie4111 »

I get that they have to make changes to the google search box because so many people are just using ChatGPT/Cluade to answer questions instead of google.

However, I specifically use Google (or DDG) when the LLMs are failing me. When I want "research something on my own" because the LLM is giving me garbage, or untrustworthy information. If Google completely replaces their search box my Google usage will go down even further.

I don't plan to use Google's LLM when Cluade is just better. Now that Google's search features are gone (or going away) I no longer have any reason to turn to them at all

Re: Google changes its search box

#315

Post by tempest_ »

nostrademons wrote: post #162
nilamo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's wrong 2 out of 5 times, why even waste your time going to it in the first place? That's a massive failure rate.

If I'm going to an LLM (as with websearch before it), it's usually because I don't know the answer, don't have anyone close to me that knows the answer, and can't pay anyone (or don't know who to pay) for the answer. In other words, my failure rate without the LLM would be 100%.

The problem is that everything you have said renders you unable to determine the validity of the answer provided.

Sometimes that is fine, sometimes it is not

Re: Google changes its search box

#317

Post by kxrm »

carlosjobim wrote: post #265
kxrm wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without google crawling your site, you don't get any new traffic. But with google crawling your site, you also might not get any traffic. I may be strange and unusual, but I just have never cared about my Google ranking. I know this makes me out of the ordinary among site owners but I have been humming along fine. This certainly will disrupt traffic but for some of my sites I honestly think this is a good thing. I…

> I have been humming along fine. Do you depend on site visitors for making a living? That's what this is about.

Yes! However most of my users were established through my network, not search.

I know that sites relying on ad income will and are being hurt tremendously by this effort on Google's part. However, if you are in the startup space and make money on services you offer, search should be one of several strategies you are deploying for user growth.

Re: Google changes its search box

#318

Post by burnte »

skywhopper wrote: post #59
dbbk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of Google AI Mode is sourced.

Yes, and those sources often contradict the AI summary if you follow them (or if you know anything about the topic).

I love when I read the source link and it says the exact opposite of what the AI summary said.

Sorry, no, I hate that.

Re: Google changes its search box

#319

Post by vb-8448 »

al_borland wrote: post #269
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.

It seems like they should have a model similar to YouTube. If I watch a video on YouTube made by someone, they get a little cash, and it ads up. Similarly, if I use Gemini uses a website for an answer, it should pay something to those sites for the information it gathered. Sites would need to sign up to earn via Google, and I'd imagine there would be a certain threshold to cross to make it worth cutting checks... but…

Actually it cannot work this way, content creators make far more money from ads in the video itself compared to the one yt gives them. If it were for yt money alone basically we will still be in the 2010 yt: folks that doing it just for fun.

The problem with all this AI/llm stuff is that end users doesn't even know your tiny site with a lot of useful information exists at all.

Re: Google changes its search box

#320

Post by [deleted] »

burnte wrote: post #309
fscaramuzza wrote: post #290

What scares me about this new AI mode thingy is that every answer sounds like a systematic literature review, but only for the results. For example, if I look for users feedback about a specific product, it says "People think that..., but also that...; It's important to notice that some people ..." where with 'people' it means just a random comment on a random website just because it thought it was a good contributio…

> What scares me about this new AI mode thingy What scares me is the rampant inaccuracy. In my experience, the AI responses are wrong about 65% of the time. I just did a search today about an error talking about a disconnected link between apps, and Google AI result summary told me that the error was related to my pulling a USB drive too quickly in windows. The ONLY word similar to my query and that AI response was t…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN