I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx • Hacker News Board

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#11

Post by dessant » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

The redesigned version of Google Search that is being A/B tested no longer shows links. Despite being a developer, I'm anxious to click search results, especially because when results are filtered to be from the last day or week, they are full of phishing sites and pages with scraped content that immediately redirect to malware.

This change can't possibly be beneficial to users. It makes people even more ignorant about the technologies they depend on, and exposes them to further risk of being exploited.

UPDATE: This is the new design I've seen, the domains are missing: https://i.imgur.com/5RTdXI1.png

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#12

Post by Thorrez » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:03 PM UTC

dljsjr wrote: post #6

Spivak wrote: post #3

Serious question, why search Google in your terminal with Lynx as opposed to `googler`? The actual result pages can still open in Lynx but the experience of navigating the results is very nice.

Author of the post is blind so I'd imagine the usage of Lynx is for screen reading/accessibility reasons.

Spivak is asking why Mario isn't using https://github.com/jarun/googler .

If Mario is able to use Lynx, the expectation is that Mario can probably also use googler.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#13

Post by Thorrez » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:06 PM UTC

MBCook wrote: post #10

exikyut wrote: post #9

Curious, I installed lynx just to check this out. I find that I physically cannot navigate to the links in the page except the first few at the top. But. On the pages I get, the ... structure is still 100% intact. It's buried in a table and div soup, but it's there. So, I argue Lynx parsing bug! The author of this article would have done well to save and diff the working/not-working HTML they received. :(

Why should anyone have to do that? If the site stops working for the user than it no longer works. Should they be expected to make their own ‘re-Googler’ to fix the page so they can use it again?

>Why should anyone have to do that?

When there's a browser bug, someone needs to debug it and fix the browser. Otherwise the browser bug will remain forever.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#14

Post by tdurden » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #3

Serious question, why search Google in your terminal with Lynx as opposed to `googler`? The actual result pages can still open in Lynx but the experience of navigating the results is very nice.

I would imagine that most are not aware of googler &/or do not want to use one tool to search and another tool to browse

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#15

Post by 1996 » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:14 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #7

I feel like many of the text-mode browsers have failed to keep up with changing web standards. We were all mad when IE was holding back the Internet, and I'm not sure we should give lynx and w3m a pass because they're geek tools. (Accessibility is an important concern, but web browsers running under a GUI system support screen readers.) https://www.brow.sh/ is a console-based browser that claims to support modern sta…

w3m gets a pass because javascript is bad. The FSF is right about that. wasm will be even worse. Not technically worse, but for removing another layer of control. DNS over HTTPS is just as bad in that sense.

If you can make something without JS you should. cryptomarketplot.com has an accessible mode FOR CRYPTO!! If crypto sites can, everybody can.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#16

Post by jlg23 » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:16 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #7

I feel like many of the text-mode browsers have failed to keep up with changing web standards. We were all mad when IE was holding back the Internet, and I'm not sure we should give lynx and w3m a pass because they're geek tools. (Accessibility is an important concern, but web browsers running under a GUI system support screen readers.) https://www.brow.sh/ is a console-based browser that claims to support modern sta…

One does not need to time travel to 1999 to accommodate text browsers, current HTML works just fine.

OTOH I don't worry too much, accessibility-enforcing laws will provide plenty of job opportunities for future developers... So yeah, good move, I guess.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#17

Post by hlandau » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:18 PM UTC

inciampati wrote: post #4

Another person notes that ddg is inferior. Maybe people get used to a certain way of searching with Google that doesn't translate to ddg. Haven't noticed a drop in quality myself and I think I might have been retrained to use different patterns and techniques in structuring my queries.

What's really weird about DDG is that the results from the no-JavaScript version seem far inferior to the results from the JS-enabled version of DDG.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#18

Post by hombre_fatal » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:20 PM UTC

dessant wrote: post #11

The redesigned version of Google Search that is being A/B tested no longer shows links. Despite being a developer, I'm anxious to click search results, especially because when results are filtered to be from the last day or week, they are full of phishing sites and pages with scraped content that immediately redirect to malware. This change can't possibly be beneficial to users. It makes people even more ignorant abo…

They took urls away and then added this: https://i.imgur.com/RI4xxgs.png

For example, searched "hierarchy" and it'll show "en.wikipedia.org > wiki > hierarchy" above the wikipedia search result.

> This change can't possibly be beneficial to users.

You're right if the url/domain isn't even shown at all. But I can think of a few benefits of showing the domain as it currently does, like to avoid phishing. It also basically parses the url and interprets it for less-technical users which is something that more-technical users are already doing when they read the url.

I don't think it's so bad as a default if there's a config option for displaying the full url for more technical users, or the necessary data available to at least write a browser extension.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#19

Post by TeMPOraL » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:21 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #7

I feel like many of the text-mode browsers have failed to keep up with changing web standards. We were all mad when IE was holding back the Internet, and I'm not sure we should give lynx and w3m a pass because they're geek tools. (Accessibility is an important concern, but web browsers running under a GUI system support screen readers.) https://www.brow.sh/ is a console-based browser that claims to support modern sta…

I'll be the first (EDIT: third) of six.

> If all that stuff works for everyone, why did we invent new stuff? Just because? Or perhaps it wasn't really as amazing as well all remember.

To better track people and push ads. It's really mostly just it. Modern web has very little to do with providing value to the end-user; any utility that's provided is mostly a side effect, and/or a vector to lure people into situations where they can be monetized.

Text browsers aren't holding the web down, they're anchoring it in the port of productivity, even as the winds of commerce desperately try to blow it onto the open seas of exploitation.

Re: I am no longer able to use Google with Lynx

#20

Post by Proven » Mon, Nov 25, 2019, 4:23 PM UTC

inciampati wrote: post #4

Another person notes that ddg is inferior. Maybe people get used to a certain way of searching with Google that doesn't translate to ddg. Haven't noticed a drop in quality myself and I think I might have been retrained to use different patterns and techniques in structuring my queries.

Inferior how?

For my purposes its results aren't as good. But also overall it provides much better privacy and isn't intrusive.

Then - for folks who equally value these three things - ddg isn't inferior. When I can't find something on DDG, I use Google. Or if I'm pretty sure I won't find it, I start with Google. But I normally start - and end - my searches with DDG. For me DDG is not inferior to GSE.