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

411–420 of 961 posts

Re: Google changes its search box

#411

Post by seanalltogether »

alt227 wrote: post #159

So how does google now make money when it is just providing us with direct answers from ai, instead of showing us both paid for search results and directing us to sites which host targetted ads? How does adsense work when there are no search results?

"When is Stephen Colberts last show?"

"The last episode of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert is airing on Thursday, May 21, 2026. Based on your interest in The Late Show with Stephen Colbert you might also like the new Amazon Prime Video series of Last One Laughing, available to stream now"

Does that answer your question?

Re: Google changes its search box

#412

Post by jamiek88 »

youre-wrong3 wrote: post #345
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…

Oh who cares. We are barely scratching the surface of AI. You all make it sound like it’s been around for 30 years and it sucks. It will only get better. Got to stop throwing up imaginary walls like nothing will improve.

So you started with ‘highly doubtful’ as a comment, got given lots of examples and instead of assimilating that info you closed your eyes put your fingers in yours ears and said “oh who cares?’ - you’re on team AI regardless eh? That’s fucking weird mate.

Re: Google changes its search box

#413

Post by marginalia_nu »

Sometimes I hear lies and slander about big tech pulling up ladders and misusing their advantage to cement monopolies, but just look at this!

I believe I speak for everyone working on alternative search engines when I offer a heartfelt thank you to Google for their untiring effort to derail their search product.

Re: Google changes its search box

#414

Post by 9029 »

tapland wrote: post #362
OGWhales wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, I was looking up a pair of IEMS vs another pair of IEMs. It said option A is overall better, when really it was just reciting a single person's opinion. I've been aware it will summarize only a single source and present it as an aggregation of many opinions, but it stood out to me how matter-of-fact it was that the one was definitely better than the other. I simply wanted to find forum discussions on people's th…

Since the best resource is personal recommendations, got any entry level cheap IEM recommendations? Primarily to avoid even more headphone dent, not an audiophile

Not gp but I really like the sound of my GK Kuntens and 7Hz Zero2s. Both have a rather V-shaped sound signature, some like it and some don't. Though unfortunately the Zero2s feel a bit uncomfortable in my ears when using them for longer

Re: Google changes its search box

#416

Post by nicbou »

skybrian wrote: post #71
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…

Sometimes I use chatgpt thinking mode for searches when I expect there will be a lot of noise. "What are some in-depth reviews for " Have you tried explicitly asking for links to primary sources?

I see ChatGPT traffic to my website for hallucinated pages.

Re: Google changes its search box

#417

Post by augzodia »

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.

it's because both google and walmart have too much market power

Re: Google changes its search box

#418

Post by RyanOD »

sanitycheck wrote: post #321
burnte wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Yep. For years we've been telling people to 'just fucking google it', and now when they do they're getting bullshit AI answers. Worst thing is, some of these bullshit answers will be medical, some of them financial, it seems pretty certain people are being harmed.

It seems to me one needs to consider the complexity of the question they are asking before searching it.

To stick with your post, consider people asking medical or financial questions. For a wide variety of reasons, many of such questions don't have an answer. In such cases, AI is still going to take a crack at it. AI shouldn't be blamed for "bullshit answers" to such questions.

Before using AI, I think people should stop and ask themselves, "Is there really a single answer to this question? Is AI the right choice?"

Re: Google changes its search box

#419

Post by xeeeeeeeeeeenu »

sourcecodeplz wrote: post #329

I've noticed this since yesterday when i tried to do a site:url search, it gave me an AI chatbox and answer

It seems they have been A/B testing killing search operators (like "site:" or "inurl:") for a while. They randomly stop working and switching to private mode, or the other way around, makes them work again.

Re: Google changes its search box

#420

Post by thwarted »

RyanOD wrote: post #418
sanitycheck wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. For years we've been telling people to 'just fucking google it', and now when they do they're getting bullshit AI answers. Worst thing is, some of these bullshit answers will be medical, some of them financial, it seems pretty certain people are being harmed.

It seems to me one needs to consider the complexity of the question they are asking before searching it. To stick with your post, consider people asking medical or financial questions. For a wide variety of reasons, many of such questions don't have an answer. In such cases, AI is still going to take a crack at it. AI shouldn't be blamed for "bullshit answers" to such questions. Before using AI, I think people should…

When the default "search" results are AI, it's difficult, if not impossible, to "choose", since Google is pushing the AI so hard.
Post reply on HN