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

471–480 of 504 posts

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

#471

Post by d0mine »

marcus0x62 wrote: post #456
d0mine wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hospitals vs. physicians groups is a distinction without a difference in this context (people responsible for making you better). It is like on paper J&J is not responsible for cancer its baby powder causes (some bankrupt entity left holding the bag). To make sure I'm not misremembering, I've asked deepseek in web search mode: "Is it true that hospitals are increasingly owned by insurance companies in US" It says: "I…

I don't see much point in continuing this conversation. I linked you to primary source data about who owns hospitals in the United States. You responded with some AI slop with absolutely no reliable citations. I posted an analogy about the dynamic that exists between hospitals and doctors . You responded by saying that's a distinction without a difference, when the dynamic I described is a primary difference between…

You seem like a human, so I give you the benefit of the doubt. Try to see the forest behind the trees instead of just repeating yourself ignoring what is said.

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

#472

Post by AnthonyMouse »

squiggleblaz wrote: post #445
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And if Dark Google has not yet figured out how to scam AI... it is only a matter of time. There is one thing the AI companies have going for them that Google doesn't: They don't have 90% market share. That's a huge problem that only Google has, because if your black hat SEO stops working against Google, you dedicate all your efforts to fixing it until it does, and then Google has to win against the combined efforts…

If beating SEO was something a company with a different algorithm could do, then it would have happened by now. Google remains the default search engine because the alternatives are perhaps even more susceptible to SEO than Google, so there just isn't the motivation to use them. Why do I have to go to the second or third page to find an answer with a naive search on DDG?

> If beating SEO was something a company with a different algorithm could do, then it would have happened by now.

The reductio of this argument is that nothing can ever change or improve because if it was possible someone would have done it already.

More to the point, people who have used Kagi seem to speak favorably of it. A search engine you have to pay for is never going to be the mass market option, but it can have enough users to be self-sustaining and remain one of the options, and it proves it can be done.

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

#473

Post by masa331 »

NBJack wrote: post #317
masa331 wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using it for about two years and i haven't seen any sloppification. I see it as a feature that it is a paid service because i hope it will be a sustainable model for them to keep it as it is. I think it's a no brainer to pay for it instead of all the suffering people describe here. The founder remark i don't get

Not to discourage you, but note it took a while before Google succumbed. Hopefully Kagi will hold out.

Right now Kagi is a better search engine than Google. Why should some eventual demise in the future discourage anyone? There is no cost of switching and you can start using it right away

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

#474

Post by sroussey »

hinkley wrote: post #288
simoncion wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your trainer advises you to reduce your calorie intake to between 200 and 500 calories per day? [0] That sounds very, very hazardous for anything other than very short term use, and (given the body's inbuilt "starvation mode") probably counterproductive, even then. [0] Note that the robot suggested to reduce calorie intake by 1,500->1,800 calories, and the recommended calorie intake is 2,000.

People losing weight are probably eating more than 2000 per day to begin with. But if you go from 2800 down to 1500 you’re already likely to exceed 3 lbs of weight loss per week that is recommended without doctor supervision. If you need to lose more than 150 lbs in a year because you’re well past morbid obesity then you need staff, not just a food plan.

If you’re eating out at Chilies, you could easily be eating 3000 calories per meal.

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

#475

Post by maest »

glenstein wrote: post #395
Lewton wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A week ago, I was looking for the name of a semi obscure late 90ies computer game. Google could not help me given the description i gave Described it to ChatGPT, and we had a back and forth where I explained why the games it suggested me weren’t right, it eventually found the correct game (Nocturne) and was able to explain to me that half of the things I remembered from the game were just plain wrong, and that’s why…

I've had a conversation almost exactly like this too, about an obscure dos based 3d fighting game. And some pessimistic instinct tells me I should worry, like this capability will be optimized away in future versions. It's like that precise pang of satisfaction is tied to a jaded feeling that I can't trust it to last if it ultimately depends on infrastructure and incentives that will lead openai toward eating the wor…

> And some pessimistic instinct tells me I should worry, like this capability will be optimized away in future versions.

A big difference here is that oprn source models are available, effective and checkpointed at this point in time!

Worst case scenario, we stop getting new open source models and are forced to query new, suboptimal models only for recent information.

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

#477

Post by Deegy »

weberer wrote: post #104
Deegy wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once chatGPT and Claude (through MCP) added web search functionality I completely dropped Perplexity. I assume I'm not unique in this regard. Feels like the writing is on the wall for Perplexity.

Could you explain more? Are the results better, or are there other features?

It's mostly a decision to manage the total amount I spend on LLM tools. Given unlimited money I suppose I'd still be subscribed to Perplexity because the UI is slightly better than Claude and chatGPT for web results. But Claude and chatGPT are plenty enough for my web use cases while allowing me full access to all of their models for non web search use cases.

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

#478

Post by jvanderbot »

BoorishBears wrote: post #440
jvanderbot wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but yes, when it asks questions they are trivial disambiguation of mainly language, and never information seeking like you might expect when doing more than superficial investigation

If you can't tell if I'm being sarcastic about an LLM asking clarifying questions, you are possibly not great at using LLMs. Prompting isn't necessarily the career some people wanted was sold as, but it's not a bad idea to practice a bit and build a sense of what a clear and effective prompt looks like. - To be clear, I get telling people it's a "you" problem every time an issue with LLMs comes up isn't helpful... bu…

Nobody has more PEBKAC problems than me. It might be my experience is colored by older models. I can give it another shot. But I do use LLMs quite a lot and got decent and surprising functionality out of them in the past. I was just consistently vexed by this one thing when doing information seeking search -like activity.

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

#479

Post by kkarakk »

johny115 wrote: post #464
TeMPOraL wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dark Google isn't a new thing. Isn't even an Internet thing. It's the very same cancerous growth on society that's been ruining every single communication medium we invented, the disease that's the answer to "why X sucks?" for any X. Advertising industry . I wish I knew what it would take for people to stop treating the unholy blend of marketing communications as respectable occupation, and consider it for what it is…

Devs always complain about advertising, but it's why devs tend to do much better comparatively to other jobs in same region. Without distribution mechanisms, there are no sales, without sales, there are no well paid jobs, and eventually no jobs at all. Similar can be said about almost any other job, except the well-paid part. Look at the world before advertising. Everything had to be local small scale only. So everyt…

going from 0 to profitable doesn't require that much marketing. people do discuss good products and recommend them for pain points independent of being bombarded with ads for them. you can talk about your product to people who need it.

going from profitable to "we own gigantic yachts that supply our humongous yachts" aka jeff bezos money requires absurdly crafted insidious borderline evil marketing.

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

#480

Post by marcus0x62 »

d0mine wrote: post #471
marcus0x62 wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see much point in continuing this conversation. I linked you to primary source data about who owns hospitals in the United States. You responded with some AI slop with absolutely no reliable citations. I posted an analogy about the dynamic that exists between hospitals and doctors . You responded by saying that's a distinction without a difference, when the dynamic I described is a primary difference between…

You seem like a human, so I give you the benefit of the doubt. Try to see the forest behind the trees instead of just repeating yourself ignoring what is said.

> Try to see the forest behind the trees instead of just repeating yourself ignoring what is said.

I'm not ignoring anything. I posted an analogy about how the US hospital business has some similar incentive structures as Google's search business, in that both are dependent on third-parties to deliver revenue. You, for reasons that are not clear to me, felt the need to post an unhelpful, off-topic, and incorrect rant about the insurance system in the US backed up, apparently, by nothing more than your favorite AI hallucination engine.

I don't think you've even tried to understand what I posted or why, nor do I think you are capable of understanding why your claim is completely irrelevant to what I wrote. Guess what? Even if insurance companies purchased every single hospital in the country, those hospitals would still be dependent on the doctors to operate.

Post reply on HN