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

Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

sparktoro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 531 posts

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#141

Post by Nasrudith »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #68
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard a decent amount of wrong takes on Section 230. But this is the most bizarre, yet. Neither the CDA, nor section 230 specifically, create the sort of publisher/platform dichotomy people seem to be hung up on. And Section 230 does exactly the opposite of what people commonly think it does. It's actually right there, in the text: No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on ac…

But the inherently problem is that they need to be held liable for the rest. Because the rest is often criminal activity of which those platforms are making a profit. Perhaps removing Section 230 isn't enough , by your definition, because we need a law that explicitly holds platforms liable for profits generated from illegal activity.

That is a curious definition of need. Are landlords liable in your world for renting apartments to people who run ponzi schemes?

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#142

Post by skybrian »

nostromo wrote: post #108
SilasX wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, I think there's scumminess on both sides, since (as GP noted) even simple sites (e.g. for lyrics) are bloated and unusable. Before: User: Hey Google, what's the monthly payment on a 20-year mortgage with 3.9% APR? Google: Oh, MortgateSite would know, go there. MortgageSite: Here's your calculator. User: Okay, let me put in the numbers ... awesome, thanks! Oh, neat, they can hook me up with lenders. Let me take a…

Google could fix that if they wanted to. I remember when Google used to push content developers to be better: no paywalls, no overlays, faster response times, no scammy ads, no content farms. Those days seem to be over. Google is constantly sending me to content behind paywalls and under pop up content.

I agree that paywalls seem more common. But the early web had plenty of popups and scummy ads. Popup blockers were added to browsers quite a long time ago.

Content farms were huge before Google started kicking them out in 2011. Have they made a comeback?

Google's latest attempt to keep the crap under control (AMP) is very unpopular on Hacker News, but I guess it shows they are trying to do something?

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#143

Post by nostromo »

ajross wrote: post #132
nostromo wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google could fix that if they wanted to. I remember when Google used to push content developers to be better: no paywalls, no overlays, faster response times, no scammy ads, no content farms. Those days seem to be over. Google is constantly sending me to content behind paywalls and under pop up content.

So you blame Google for paywalls and full screen ads on the pages... you demand they send you to in lieu of just hosting some content themselves? Seems like Google just can't win in that scenario. FWIW: I agree that for a long time, the need to rank highly in Google's searches pushed content sites to be a better experience. And the equilibrium we've reached isn't as nice as it was 10 years ago. I just don't think "be…

Google's whole value proposition is sending me to the best place on the web for a given query -- so yes, when they don't do that it's frustrating.

No, I don't blame them for hosting the content themselves for some queries. I never said that.

Just as Amazon holds some responsibility when I purchase a counterfeit item on their platform, it behooves both companies to have higher quality standards -- and both have the market strength to do it.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#144

Post by icebraining »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #68
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard a decent amount of wrong takes on Section 230. But this is the most bizarre, yet. Neither the CDA, nor section 230 specifically, create the sort of publisher/platform dichotomy people seem to be hung up on. And Section 230 does exactly the opposite of what people commonly think it does. It's actually right there, in the text: No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on ac…

But the inherently problem is that they need to be held liable for the rest. Because the rest is often criminal activity of which those platforms are making a profit. Perhaps removing Section 230 isn't enough , by your definition, because we need a law that explicitly holds platforms liable for profits generated from illegal activity.

Section 230 didn't prevent Google from being fined $500M for publishing ads for Canadian pharmacies selling drugs to US citizens. What kind of illegal activities are you talking about, exactly?

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#145

Post by leetcrew »

ryandrake wrote: post #123
SilasX wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, I think there's scumminess on both sides, since (as GP noted) even simple sites (e.g. for lyrics) are bloated and unusable. Before: User: Hey Google, what's the monthly payment on a 20-year mortgage with 3.9% APR? Google: Oh, MortgateSite would know, go there. MortgageSite: Here's your calculator. User: Okay, let me put in the numbers ... awesome, thanks! Oh, neat, they can hook me up with lenders. Let me take a…

You forgot: MortgageSite: Please wait while we take 10 seconds to calculate an interest rate AND CHECK OUT THIS SPONSOR! MortgageSite: Five more seconds. YOUR COMPUTER MIGHT HAVE A VIRUS!! DOWNLOAD THIS FREE SCANNER NOW! MortgageSite: Your rate has been calculated! Click HERE to reveal it using a totally pointless JavaScript animation! User: Finally, now I’ll just move my cursor up and close this tab. MortgageSite: O…

also, "your rate is ready! just enter your email address and we will send it to you!"

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#146

Post by rchaud »

SilasX wrote: post #52
puranjay wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your stand, but what Google did with its featured snippets is essentially a form of bait and switch. It encouraged entrepreneurs and creators to create content that could answer specific queries with the promise that Google will drive traffic to their sites. Now Google is using the same content and depriving them of the traffic. That's pretty scummy in my opinion.

Hm, I think there's scumminess on both sides, since (as GP noted) even simple sites (e.g. for lyrics) are bloated and unusable. Before: User: Hey Google, what's the monthly payment on a 20-year mortgage with 3.9% APR? Google: Oh, MortgateSite would know, go there. MortgageSite: Here's your calculator. User: Okay, let me put in the numbers ... awesome, thanks! Oh, neat, they can hook me up with lenders. Let me take a…

And yet if you type in a mortgage-related query, the first few entries Google will show you are ads. Not the calculator you're looking for.

Even then, mortgages aren't something Google can realistically calculate because lenders don't structure loans that simply. There is a fixed rate period, and a variable period after that.

First-time searchers may get suckered in by a personal finance site that relies on ads just as Google itself does, but after that, they'll be using the calculators that are on lenders' own sites when it's time to comparison shop.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#147

Post by Nasrudith »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #57
avocado4 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumers win in this scenario.

Do they really though? See my comments on: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20688022 Essentially, if Google's data source isn't getting paid, the data source is not going to remain accurate, and hence, neither will Google.

I don't see the relationship either way between payment and accuracy.

Paying people is no guarantee of accuracy in either direction. Heck paying people for it encourages putting any ole bullshit there to farm it.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#148

Post by ummonk »

concert-gilled wrote: post #115
jwilliams wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although this one I find infuriating because Google doesn't know how to correctly round off exchange rates I generally search for "1000 USD in AUD" as a workaround.

Both cases showed 2 decimal places for me.

You get 5 decimal places if you divide by 1000...

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#149

Post by TeMPOraL »

SilasX wrote: post #52
puranjay wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your stand, but what Google did with its featured snippets is essentially a form of bait and switch. It encouraged entrepreneurs and creators to create content that could answer specific queries with the promise that Google will drive traffic to their sites. Now Google is using the same content and depriving them of the traffic. That's pretty scummy in my opinion.

Hm, I think there's scumminess on both sides, since (as GP noted) even simple sites (e.g. for lyrics) are bloated and unusable. Before: User: Hey Google, what's the monthly payment on a 20-year mortgage with 3.9% APR? Google: Oh, MortgateSite would know, go there. MortgageSite: Here's your calculator. User: Okay, let me put in the numbers ... awesome, thanks! Oh, neat, they can hook me up with lenders. Let me take a…

Perfect world:

User: Hey Gateway, what's the monthly payment on a 20-year mortgage with 3.9 APR?

Gateway: Here's your calculator, already prefilled with the data taken from your query.

Done.

The problem with all these little sites is, besides bloat, that the "Oh, neat, they can hook me up with lenders. Let me take a look." ends up with user getting malware and/or scammed. The problem with Google is that they can hardly be trusted at this point to do things like this in the interest of users. They want to be the frontend through which you access the Internet.

I used the word "Gateway" in my example as a placeholder; my imaginary perfect world recognizes that things like "currency conversion", "song lyrics" or "mortgage calculator" are data[0], which should be separate from the frontend used to access it. I dream of the Internet where things like these are API-driven and do not involve loading anything other than what's requested - neither ads, nor "value-adds", and definitely not all the rest of the webpage surrounding a mortgage calculator, which is bloat obstructing requested functionality.

--

[0] - yes, even mortgage calculator; it's a mathematical model, an algorithm, and code is data.

Re: Fewer Than Half of Google Searches Now Result in a Click

#150

Post by wongarsu »

noobermin wrote: post #120
wongarsu wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good comparison here is WolframAlpha, which can also answer all those queries (I was a bit surprised that the Texas Rangers example worked, but it does [1]). Most of their data comes from a curated list of primary sources, not Wikipedia or random websites. 1: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=texas+rangers+next+gam...

Curated might be better, Google has been wrong in their answers in the past.

Not only are the sources of WolframAlpha curated, they even go the extra step to make sure it's correct. From their FAQ:

"How is Wolfram|Alpha's data checked?

We use a portfolio of automated and manual methods, including statistics, visualization, source cross-checking and expert review. With trillions of pieces of data, it's inevitable that there are still errors out there.

[...]

How is real-time data curated?

Wolfram|Alpha effectively checks real-time data (such as weather, earthquakes, market prices, etc.) against built-in criteria and models. If an unexpected deviation is found, Wolfram|Alpha will normally indicate it, for example by showing lines as dashed."

https://www.wolframalpha.com/faqs/#data-in-wolfram-alpha

Post reply on HN