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

751–760 of 961 posts

Re: Google changes its search box

#751

Post by techterrier »

RealCodingOtaku wrote: post #724

Most of all websites will lose their traffic, some already did. - People using the search console see the drop - Product owners scratch their head - Investors backing out because not having many visitors - Small bloggers adding more ads because their revenue is dropping - Sponsors backing out from their blogs because it's loosing more visitors - Small web crumbling - People google what is happening - Google says 'The…

hello, smol webber here (wildlife photos), can confirm the drop off is happening. I dont care about my own site tho, its just a convenient place to put things. Id be doing exactly the same for 1 user or 1 million users.

https://dombarker.co.uk/

Re: Google changes its search box

#752

Post by yoz-y »

acron0 wrote: post #668
tardedmeme wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can buy recipe books at brick and mortar stores, and they're mostly not AI slop yet.

My partner recently bought a receipe book that was probably 100% slop, from the recipes themselvea to the images for each dish.

Online grocery shopping service I use has added recipes to their website. Not obvious slop at first reading but then you see stuff like add 600g of carrots and 100ml of water to make a quite watery soup according to the picture.

Re: Google changes its search box

#753

Post by ethbr1 »

acron0 wrote: post #668
tardedmeme wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can buy recipe books at brick and mortar stores, and they're mostly not AI slop yet.

My partner recently bought a receipe book that was probably 100% slop, from the recipes themselvea to the images for each dish.

We're already post dead info.

The only solution is to find recipe books that were printed in previous decades.

Which is ironic, given that Google's entire value proposition (to users) was extracting signal from noise...

... and now it's come full A/B-advertising-optimization to being useless at that, when the need is greater than ever.

Imho, Google's greatest failing was missing how its own incentives warped creation of new web content, and failing to account for that strategically -- it turned the web into something it can't itself usefully parse.

Re: Google changes its search box

#754

Post by andrepd »

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…

It's all slop. Look at the first two examples in their own announcement: fitness and wellness slop from websites like "top 11 exercises to do when you work from home", and god damn sneaker drops and what bloody influencers are saying about some celeb-endorsed sneaker. Jesus christ

Re: Google changes its search box

#755

Post by andrepd »

wodenokoto wrote: post #714
mort96 wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An LLM answer is not "better", it's in a completely different category. LLM answers can be useful , for topics where you can easily verify a fact (i.e if you ask for a Linux command and it gives you one, you can run it and see if it did what you wanted), or for topics which are more opinion than pure fact ("list some trade-offs between decision A and decision B"). But when you want information that's provided by some…

> But you could still dig through it and find those primary sources. That is, in my opinion, the primary purpose of a search engine. And you are a small minority. People go to google to get answers, not to look for articles in order to look for answers in the articles.

Yeah all you need is answer-shaped text. Why would the truth of that answer matter at all?

Re: Google changes its search box

#756

Post by philipwhiuk »

nkingsy wrote: post #503

I had an interesting one yesterday. Someone responded to me on Reddit with very official sounding words to make their argument. I was still dubious and googled a few of the concepts they threw out there. The AI confidently told me they were right. Then I checked the sources, and found the only source that agreed with them was their own Reddit comment!!!

Citogenesis used to take weeks, now it's complete in minutes.

Re: Google changes its search box

#757

Post by Unai »

Andrex wrote: post #107
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?

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.

> Websites may go back to being simply labors of love.

If I'm gonna lose my job, at least give me that in return

Re: Google changes its search box

#758

Post by ethbr1 »

soco wrote: post #701
acron0 wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My partner recently bought a receipe book that was probably 100% slop, from the recipes themselvea to the images for each dish.

Completely unrelated to AI, I buy and always bought recipe books in second hand bookstores. It has this vintage vibe, and not everything has to be kale. Downside is that some ingredients aren't easily reachable, but it doesn't happen that often.

My favorite are 50s and 60s recipe books. They use modern ingredients where appropriate, but mostly basic ingredients.

Later and you start seeing "Use this new processed wunderfood ingredient substitute!" (70s-00s)

Re: Google changes its search box

#760

Post by akazantsev »

baggachipz wrote: post #204
raincole wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kagi relies on Google search.

True in large part, but they've been diversifying their providers in the expectation that Google shut everybody out.

The thing is, they were diversifying with Russia's Yandex... Which is worse for some.
Post reply on HN