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

Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

growtika.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 177 posts

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#131

Post by visarga »

Latty wrote: post #66
xrd wrote: post #5

I recently replaced a power supply to upgrade a GPU. I bought the power supply on Cragslist, so it had a jumble of cables and no manual. In the past I would have read an article that I would have found on one of those sites. This time I conversed entirely with Gemini, sending pictures of the cables and of the components and the motherboard. I'll not soon forget when I plugged in a cable incorrectly and sent an image…

It's crazy to me that you'd trust the output of an LLM for that. It's something where if you do it wrong it could cause major damage, and LLMs are literally famous for creating plausbile-sounding but wrong output. If you wanted to use an LLM to identify it, sure, you can validate that, and then find the manufacturer instructions and use those. Just following what it says about the cables without any validation it's c…

> It's crazy to me that you'd trust the output of an LLM for that. It's something where if you do it wrong it could cause major damage,

With critical tasks you need to cross reference multiple AI, start by running 4 deep reports, on Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity, then put all of them into a comparative - critical analysis round. This reduces variance, the models are different, and using different search tools, you can even send them in different directions, one searches blogs, one reddit, etc.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#132

Post by visarga »

PacificSpecific wrote: post #10
xrd wrote: post #5

I recently replaced a power supply to upgrade a GPU. I bought the power supply on Cragslist, so it had a jumble of cables and no manual. In the past I would have read an article that I would have found on one of those sites. This time I conversed entirely with Gemini, sending pictures of the cables and of the components and the motherboard. I'll not soon forget when I plugged in a cable incorrectly and sent an image…

If the hardware changes significantly and those sites don't exist in the future wouldn't that mean gemeni would degrade in quality because it has nothing to pull from?

> because it has nothing to pull from?

Chat rooms produce trillions of tokens per day now, interactive tokens, where AI can poke and prod at us, and have its ideas tested in the real world (by us).

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#133

Post by visarga »

andy81 wrote: post #13
PacificSpecific wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the hardware changes significantly and those sites don't exist in the future wouldn't that mean gemeni would degrade in quality because it has nothing to pull from?

We've all tried to ask the LLM about something outside of its training data by now. In that situation, they give the (wrong) answer that sounds the most plausible.

> In that situation, they give the (wrong) answer that sounds the most plausible.

Not if you use web search or deep report, you should not use LLMs as knowledge bases, they are language models - they learn language not information, and are just models not replicas of the training set.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#134

Post by delecti »

vel0city wrote: post #123
dehrmann wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'll not soon forget when I plugged in a cable incorrectly I'm surprised this was a problem. Back in the day, there were things like making sure your two very similar AT power connectors had the black wires next to each other, not forcing in a molex connector upside down, or the same for ribbon cables. These days? The connectors are standardized and keyed, as long as your modular PSU vendor didn't get lazy on their…

FWIW, things are standardized and keyed on the ATX board side of things. They aren't standardized on the power supply side of a modular power supply. Unless you've absolutely confirmed pinouts, never swap cables between modular power supplies. Fitment doesn't imply its actually going to put the right voltage on the right pins. Even within the same manufacturer pinouts have sometimes been different between models!

Also, some non-standard hardware looks very standard. (At least some) Dell motherboard/PSU connectors infamously are physically compatible (the plug fits the socket) with the ATX standard, but the wiring is sufficiently different that it can damage or be damaged by other hardware.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#136

Post by Latty »

visarga wrote: post #131
Latty wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy to me that you'd trust the output of an LLM for that. It's something where if you do it wrong it could cause major damage, and LLMs are literally famous for creating plausbile-sounding but wrong output. If you wanted to use an LLM to identify it, sure, you can validate that, and then find the manufacturer instructions and use those. Just following what it says about the cables without any validation it's c…

> It's crazy to me that you'd trust the output of an LLM for that. It's something where if you do it wrong it could cause major damage, With critical tasks you need to cross reference multiple AI, start by running 4 deep reports, on Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity, then put all of them into a comparative - critical analysis round. This reduces variance, the models are different, and using different search tool…

Or you can ask for a link to the manual. I genuinely can't tell if your post is real advice or sarcasm intended to highlight the insanity of trying to fit square pegs in round holes of using LLMs for everything.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#137

Post by mrweasel »

unglaublich wrote: post #122
Aboutplants wrote: post #48

If you’ve visited any of these sites recently it’s obvious that part of the issue is that you’re bombarded with pops, ads everywhere, autoplaying video, etc. It’s nauseating and a horrible user experience. If all I’m looking for is straightforward content/info then I’m naturally using the most efficient way to get that content/information and visiting a website is not the most efficient way anymore

Is anyone here actually browsing the internet without ad-blockers? As soon as I accidentally turn them off I am disgusted by the consumerist, snake-oil, sexist, shit-storm that's advertisement.

Technically I run a tracking blocker, it just happens to block 90+% of all ads because they want to track me.

I don't understand why ads aren't targeted towards the content of the page, rather than me as a person, that seems to be more correct in the majority of the cases.

I did accidentally try to play a YouTube video without signing into my premium account. That platforms is completely impossible to watch without premium or an ad blocker. YouTube managers should be forced to watch a few hours of content with ads enabled.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#138

Post by jmbwell »

Aboutplants wrote: post #48

If you’ve visited any of these sites recently it’s obvious that part of the issue is that you’re bombarded with pops, ads everywhere, autoplaying video, etc. It’s nauseating and a horrible user experience. If all I’m looking for is straightforward content/info then I’m naturally using the most efficient way to get that content/information and visiting a website is not the most efficient way anymore

Yes, and this has been the case for years. Cnet, ZDnet, PCmag have been user-hostile since long before AI summaries. Pop-ups, “before you go,” back jacking, all the worst.

The Verge is a surprise because it is relatively new and was relatively free of this crap for a long time.

They’re all just empty brands now. They totally caved to advertisers, and now only advertisers care about them.

I dare say AI’s popularity is a symptom of all this more than a cause.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#139

Post by JoshTriplett »

vineyardmike wrote: post #111
hypeatei wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weren't those ads always there, though? The most obvious change is that a little AI popup appears on Google search providing a brief (even if hallucinated) overview of what the user queried. Unrelated, but I wouldn't expect this take on HN where I assumed everyone knew what an ad-blocker was.

I don’t use ad block. I find that when it messes with the layout or formatting of a website it’s really annoying, and I consider the volume and type of ads an important signal for a website’s trustworthiness. Oh and plenty of devices don’t have easy access to ad block, like my work computer.

> and I consider the volume and type of ads an important signal for a website’s trustworthiness

You can get the former from the number showing up in the uBlock Origin icon.

Re: Most-read tech publications have lost over half their Google traffic since 2024

#140

Post by SirMaster »

StLCylone wrote: post #2

AI has successfully scraped enough of their content so that they are no longer needed. Thanks for creating the content, now someone else will make money with it.

But where will the AI get new information when the websites stop publishing new info?
Post reply on HN