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

Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

chuckwnelson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 504 posts

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#181

Post by hombre_fatal »

eastbound wrote: post #21
m_ke wrote: post #8

SEO ruined the web, guided by Google's ranking algorithm. Things will get even worse as scammy companies start flooding the web with LLM generated content pushing their products to bias LLMs to increase the probability of outputing their name for keywords related to their business.

This. If Google kept at “Pages must be short and provide straight answers”, then we’d have much better search results today. Google is machine-gunning its foot since 2021, it’s really unclear to me whether they’re killing their baby just to make the job harder for competitors or something. For now… I open the Google Search results with a machete, and often don’t find any answer. Talk about severing your own foot to a…

> If Google kept at “Pages must be short and provide straight answers”, then we’d have much better search results today.

I disagree. Any prescription for what the ranking should be that isn't simply the most relevant result is a worse ranking.

I don't care if the top search result is the fastest, leanest, shortest, straightest, most adless, most equitable answer to my query if it's not the best answer to my query. I'll take the slowest loading, most verbose, popup ridden, mobile-unfriendly site if it's the one that has what I asked for.

Trying to add weights for things other than relevance is probably exactly where Google started going wrong. And then when it turned out badly, people propose yet more weights beyond relevance to fix the problem of irrelevance?

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#182

Post by Retric »

sroussey wrote: post #149
beejiu wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a more common question: "How many calories do men need to lose weight?" Google AI responded: "To lose weight, men typically need to reduce their daily calorie intake by 1,500 - 1,800 calories" Which is obviously dangerous advice. IMO Google AI overviews should not show up for anything (a) medical or (b) numerical. LLMs just aren't safe enough yet.

> Which is obviously dangerous advice. Same advice as my trainer gives me.

Did they say:

  reduce their daily calorie intake to 1,500 - 1,800 calories
  or
  reduce their daily calorie intake by 1,500 - 1,800 calories
These are very different answers, unless you’re consuming ~3,300 calories per day. These kinds of ‘subtle’ phrasing issue often results in AI mistake as both words are commonly used in advice but the context is really important.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#183

Post by Beijinger »

This! "I don't want to watch a 10-minute video for a quick answer."

And this: "OpenAI's search is becoming Google in the 2000s, if it can remain trustworthy."

The problem I see: People use OpenAI/Perplexity for knowledge. Not to seek website. I think sooner or later, most website will block AI crawlers. What does a website gets out of it?

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#184

Post by jayd16 »

ajkjk wrote: post #159
binkHN wrote: post #7

> Enter 2024 with AI. The top 20% of search results are a wall of text from AI... I'll be the contrarian here and say I actually like Google's AI Overview? For the first time in a long time, I can search for an answer to a question and, instead of getting annoying ads and SEO-optimized uselessness, I actually get an answer. Google is finally useful again. That said, once Google screws with this and starts making sear…

Google search had gotten so bad the AI overview is passable in comparison. They don't deserve credit for that! Search was better at getting useful information fifteen years ago than it does now. (And yes, the internet is way more full of garbage now--but they did that, they are responsible for that too!) ... unless you want anything like a perspective or an opinion on something, instead of a factual answer to a quest…

Why do we think the AI is any better? Isn't it based on the same dataset as search? How can it be anything but strictly worse for any given query?

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#185

Post by ChocolateGod »

Arnt wrote: post #133
the_snooze wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're perfectly capable of implementing all the same search operators as 1990s Yahoo and 2000s Google. It's a solved problem. The issue is that they don't want to. They'd rather be a middleman offering you "useful recommendations" (that they or may not sell to the highest bidder) instead of offering you value.

Are you suggesting that 2000d Google codebase would do a decent job against today's SEO?

Today's SEO isn't the reason, it's simply more profitable for Google to give you terrible search results.

It makes no financial sense for Google to give you good search results and get you off Google as soon as possible.

Instead, if they make you spend more time on Google due to having to go through more crappy results, they can sell more ads.

Most people won't change search engine and will stomach it.

Until ChatGPT happened and can save you the pain of having to use Googles search engine.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#186

Post by Aeolun »

trollbridge wrote: post #177
beejiu wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a more common question: "How many calories do men need to lose weight?" Google AI responded: "To lose weight, men typically need to reduce their daily calorie intake by 1,500 - 1,800 calories" Which is obviously dangerous advice. IMO Google AI overviews should not show up for anything (a) medical or (b) numerical. LLMs just aren't safe enough yet.

That explains why I haven't been losing weight!

I think that would explain why you’re starving, not how you’re not losing weight.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#187

Post by yieldcrv »

binkHN wrote: post #7

> Enter 2024 with AI. The top 20% of search results are a wall of text from AI... I'll be the contrarian here and say I actually like Google's AI Overview? For the first time in a long time, I can search for an answer to a question and, instead of getting annoying ads and SEO-optimized uselessness, I actually get an answer. Google is finally useful again. That said, once Google screws with this and starts making sear…

I dont find it useful for the things I search

I still have to check the sources and then add “reddit” to the end of my search query

so for me its actually an additional third step or remembering not to trust the ai overview

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#188

Post by griomnib »

Arnt wrote: post #133
the_snooze wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're perfectly capable of implementing all the same search operators as 1990s Yahoo and 2000s Google. It's a solved problem. The issue is that they don't want to. They'd rather be a middleman offering you "useful recommendations" (that they or may not sell to the highest bidder) instead of offering you value.

Are you suggesting that 2000d Google codebase would do a decent job against today's SEO?

The biggest reason SEO is profitable is because low quality sites run display ads. That is the lifeblood, and intrinsic motivation, for these sites to even exist.

Google operates the largest display ads network. They literally *pay* websites for SEO spam, and take a very healthy cut off the top.

I wish people would stop acting like Google has been in a noble battle against the spam sites, when those sites generate Google billions of dollars a year in revenue.

The obvious question is, why would they ruin search for display? The answer is greed combined with hubris. They were able to double dip for years, but they killed the golden goose.

Everybody with a brain knew this would happen when they bought Doubleclick, and it took longer than expected, but here we are.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#189

Post by shinycode »

bambax wrote: post #45

> Does ChatGPT Search have trust? Open AI isn't monetizing its search just yet, but AI has its own issues with hallucinations. Everywhere where SEO people congregate, they talk only about this: how to produce content that will eventually end up in training data for LLMs, so that when you ask about anything remotely connected to a given brand, its products will show up in the response. Ads are bad enough today, but it…

I agree we need something radically different because it’s an open gate to partial product placement with ads generated on the fly to people taste. Awful future ahead

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#190

Post by jayd16 »

Beijinger wrote: post #183

This! "I don't want to watch a 10-minute video for a quick answer." And this: "OpenAI's search is becoming Google in the 2000s, if it can remain trustworthy." The problem I see: People use OpenAI/Perplexity for knowledge. Not to seek website. I think sooner or later, most website will block AI crawlers. What does a website gets out of it?

I'm still waiting for the AI service that turns those 10 minute videos into a text tutorial with photos.

I think it's pretty damning that it's not a built in YouTube feature by now.

Post reply on HN