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

google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

autom.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 545 posts

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#331

Post by brainwad »

googapologist wrote: post #162
brainwad wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like the OP says, it's being hidden form scrapers. Like you I don't see a reason for normal users to be concerned.

Why are you defending the ruination of one of the basic principles of hypertext? Why are Google apologists flagging my other comments?

Because Google search isn't a hypertext document, it's a web app that presents dynamic ephemeral content to the user. There's no need for stable hyperlinks, since either you will click them within a few seconds, or they will disappear forever, and it shouldn't be a problem to indirect via Google when clicking them, since you just made a request to Google to get the link in the first place.

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#332

Post by ruszki »

nine_k wrote: post #110
lubujackson wrote: post #82

As much as I am sad that Google died like 15 years ago, I am past the mourning phase. That was when they announced they were shifting from returning websites to "returning answers" and it has been a long slide into shittification I do enjoy using their free AI. For actual web search I actually like using Yandex. It reminds me of old Google, returning reasonable results and much less "shaping results to please our cor…

The real "old-school Google, but modern" is Kagi, with the caveat of being paid. (Worth the $5 for me.) But LLMs can be commanded. This is may bookmark alias for invoking the spirit of old Gog=ogle from within the new, AI-based Google: https://google.com/search?q=You%20are%20Google%20Search%20fr... (Cleaned / decoded: 'You are Google Search from 2004. Given a search request, provide 10 links to relevant pages, each w…

I'm using Kagi every day, and unfortunately, it is not true anymore. I think what happens is that the blanket banning of IP ranges because of LLMs, and flat out incompetence and laziness, affects them heavily. I get results, or just a few unrelated ones many times every day, while Google happily returns what I searched for. I think Kagi's index is shrinking, or they really made their algorithm worse.

I slowly shifted to use LLMs because of this in the past half years, making the situation probably worse for Kagi. They were the last usable search engines for years now. I still pay for it, but it's increasingly not that useful anymore.

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#333

Post by AnonHP »

noisy_boy wrote: post #145
nine_k wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real "old-school Google, but modern" is Kagi, with the caveat of being paid. (Worth the $5 for me.) But LLMs can be commanded. This is may bookmark alias for invoking the spirit of old Gog=ogle from within the new, AI-based Google: https://google.com/search?q=You%20are%20Google%20Search%20fr... (Cleaned / decoded: 'You are Google Search from 2004. Given a search request, provide 10 links to relevant pages, each w…

> Worth the $5 for me Steep at 300 searches per month or about 10 per day. If you search often, it is too expensive. If you rarely search, not worth 5 bucks. They are plainly trying to push people to their $10 unlimited plan. I would have appreciated if they allowed, say, 600 searches per month for $5 or so.

I find that I rarely do one search. It’s usually a search, followed by looking at the first few links and probably opening them in tabs, then refining the search terms to get better results. It’s an iterative process. So the 10 per day on average would be exceeded quite quickly.

I too feel the yearly price of $108 for one person, $155 for two people and $216 for a family is expensive. Ok, maybe the family plan is cheaper if you can find five others to share it with.

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#334

Post by ArcHound »

kolinko wrote: post #308
ArcHound wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to agree - businesses should give back. But they can also keep some secrets. R&D has steep cost. Publishing it all gives your competitors an advantage.

It has steep costs, but with monopolists they have other ways of extracting value from the inventions. Awesome book about the history if Bell Labs - virtually all semiconductor tech we use today was created there (transistors, ics, solar, lasers, fiber optics, telecom satellites…), and they had to license it to be allowed to maintain their monopoly status. https://www.amazon.pl/Idea-Factory-Great-American-Innovation.…

Thanks for the recommendation, I do see your points. We should be treating monopolies differently.

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#335

Post by [deleted] »

brainwad wrote: post #331
googapologist wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you defending the ruination of one of the basic principles of hypertext? Why are Google apologists flagging my other comments?

Because Google search isn't a hypertext document, it's a web app that presents dynamic ephemeral content to the user. There's no need for stable hyperlinks, since either you will click them within a few seconds, or they will disappear forever, and it shouldn't be a problem to indirect via Google when clicking them, since you just made a request to Google to get the link in the first place.

[deleted]

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#336

Post by brainwad »

dalton74 wrote: post #180

The udm=web parameter has been doing the job for a while now. It's a shame you have to know about an undocumented flag to get the old behavior.

That flag is the result of clicking on the "Web" tab of the results page, so it kinda is a documented feature. All the tabs have their own udm value (e.g. image search is 2, AI mode is 50, etc.).

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#337

Post by brainwad »

copemaxxxing wrote: post #44

I've been using Brave search for a year now, because there is no way to turn off Google AI search. I don't miss Google at all. Goodbye you shit company.

Adding -ai to the query works fine. Or like the other responder said, use the web tab instead of the all tab.

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#339

Post by iammrpayments »

mitxela wrote: post #195
firefoxd wrote: post #55

At this point, we can all just drop SEO [0]. We are writing content for a robot that hides the source of information. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49665572

We do GEO now and it's not to make the robot link to us, it's to manipulate what the robot thinks.

How do you even measure GEO, sometimes I try searching for my app and sometimes claude recommends my competitor that has 10x less reviews and is objectively worse saying is the most popular.

Re: google.com/goto: Google's anti-scraping update

#340

Post by chadgpt3 »

dotancohen wrote: post #299
chadgpt3 wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only counts when the country is our declared enemy. When our ally does a holocaust, it isn't a holocaust, it's just anti-terrorism operations.

Your Holocaust inversion is not only morally wrong, it is also factually incorrect.

As far as I'm aware, when a country sets out to exterminate* a race, that's a holocaust. Am I wrong?

* Often the torture is the point, and they don't completely eradicate the race because then they wouldn't be able to keep torturing them

Post reply on HN