Live data from Hacker News

AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

arstechnica.com

281–290 of 872 posts

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made this game inspired by all the dark patterns from darkpatterns.org - every pop up is based on a real dark pattern https://www.termsandconditions.game/

Application error An error occurred in the application and your page could not be served. If you are the application owner, check your logs for details. You can do this from the Heroku CLI with the command heroku logs --tail

I also get that.

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#282
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was at an event where someone was arguing there wasn't an entry fee because chatgpt said it was free (with a screenshot of proof) then asked why they weren't honoring their online price.

A good time to teach a hard lesson about the trustworthiness of LLM output

I think you misunderstand who the victims of this situation is (hint probably everybody but google)

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#283

Here is the experience when clicking a link on mobile: * Page loads, immediately when I start scrolling and reading a popup trying to get tracking consent * If I am lucky, there is a "necessary only". When unlucky I need to click "manage options" and first see how to reject all tracking * There is a sticky banner on top/bottom taking 20-30% of my screen upselling me a subscription or asking me to install their app. U…

That's why I don't use mobile for browsing. Only Firefox with JS disabled unless it's needed and I need that page.

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#285
post #234

Of course slow, shitty web sites also cause a massive drop in clicks, as soon as an alternative to clicking emerges. It's just like on HN, if I see an interesting title and want to know what the article is about, I can wince and click the article link, but it's much faster and easier to click the HN comments link and infer the info I want from the comments. That difference is almost entirely from the crappy overdesig…

> faster and easier to click the HN comments link and infer the info I want from the comments Or, youre confusing primordial desire to be aligned with perceived peers -- checking what others say, then effortlessly nodding along -- with forming your own judgment.

I mean, not necessarily. If there’s more eyes on the article and people share their opinions, then problems or mistakes in it will become more obvious, much like how code bugs can become shallow.

At the same time, I have no issue disagreeing with whatever is the popular stance, there’s almost some catharsis in just speaking the truth along the lines of “What you say might be true in your circumstances and culture, but software isn’t built like that here.”

Regardless, I’d say that there’s nothing wrong with finding likeminded peers either, for example if everyone around you views something like SOLID and DRY as dogma and you think there must be a better, more nuanced way.

Either that, or everyone likes a good tl;dr summary.

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#286

And thank God! It does. I’m done dealing with bazillion shitty websites with bad, slow, performance, bad ui and dark patterns. All I need is an information in a convenient format and that is what AI tools provide to me.

Okay, but when those sites go out of business, where does the AI get its information from? This is obviously not sustainable.

It's only the advertising-funded sites that go out of business and a lot of those sites were in any case just scraping other sites. What proportion of reliable online information is only available from a web site that is funded by advertising? It's not zero, but it's not a very big number, either, I suspect, so it might be sustainable.

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#287

Here is the experience when clicking a link on mobile: * Page loads, immediately when I start scrolling and reading a popup trying to get tracking consent * If I am lucky, there is a "necessary only". When unlucky I need to click "manage options" and first see how to reject all tracking * There is a sticky banner on top/bottom taking 20-30% of my screen upselling me a subscription or asking me to install their app. U…

AI is following the drug dealer model. “The first dose is free!” Given the cost incurred, lots of dark patterns will be coming for sure.

Yep. Dark patterns you can see are not that dark by comparison, we will need another word for coming dark patterns disguised in llm responses

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is the stupidest position ever if Google wants to exist long term. Unfortunately there are no workable alternatives. DDG is somehow not better, though I use it to avoid trackers.

It's a bit like the Easter Islanders cutting down all of their trees for wood. Where does Google management think they'll get search results if they kill the entire internet? Has anyone at Google thought that far ahead?

The internet they dream of is like a large mall. It consists of service providers selling you something, and Google directing you to them in exchange for some of the profit. The role of users in this model is that of a Piñata that everyone hits on to drop some money.

Re: AI overviews cause massive drop in search clicks

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the first search result for me: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/general-food...

It doesn't take long to find SEO slop trying to sell you something: When our grandmothers and grandfathers were growing up, there was a real threat to their health that we don’t face anymore. No, I’m not talking about the lack of antibiotics, nor the scarcity of nutritious food. It was trichinosis, a parasitic disease that used to be caught from undercooked pork. The legitimate worry of trichinosis led their mothers…

The link quoted does not have that text so what are you on about?

However that site gives the temperature for Pork as 71C which is not what USDA says but is correct. So using the USDA recommendation does have a risk according to at least Canada and UK

Post reply on HN