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

Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

bitbytebit.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 740 posts

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#611

Post by nerdsniper »

cryptoz wrote: post #538
xg15 wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a user, I'm still baffled that the interface to view and manage the apps I have installed on the system - which is 90 out of 100 times why I'm opening the play store - is tucked away in some obscure corner of the app. The other 10 times, it's because I want to install some specific app that I already know and I just want to get to the page of that exact app - either through a direct link or through the store's sea…

Opening the App Store to download a bunch of apps - in general - is probably the #1 thing people are doing when they open the App Store. Of course, installing a specific app is a top use case. But I think you're just not the average user. Lots of people open the App Store frequently to just check out what's available. ~10 years ago I would do this all the time. It's fun, kind of like surfin' the net was back in the o…

10 years ago that was fun. Today it’s an awful experience.

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#612

Post by amluto »

jsheard wrote: post #12

They do the same thing on the Play Store, for example I just searched for Firefox and the first result is a sponsored spot for Opera. Does Apple do that on the App Store? A funnier example: searching for Amazon gives Temu as the first result. Searching for Temu gives Shein as the first result. Searching for Shein gives Shein as the first result! ...but only because they outbid everyone else for the ad spot on their o…

I would love to see trademark law changed to ban this practice. Google, etc should not be allowed to, in effect, charge money to avoid having one’s trademark become a search term for a competitor.

Paying for ad slots to raise brand awareness is one thing, but a search for a trademark should resolve first to a valid holder of that trademark.

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#614

Post by alias_neo »

vogu66 wrote: post #606
arcbyte wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually do open the app store specifically to find a cool new app to install. I do this maybe a couple times a year. It never works. The apps it suggests are all ad farming garbage. I have found maybe one fun game doing this over the years, but mostly its been repeated frustration. I keep doing it occasionally in hopes that I find another diamond in the rough but I think Google has just trashed this whole thing up…

You can do that with F-droid, it's a lot of fun seeing what open source app people developed

I always do this on F-Droid, always find nice gems in there.

Wouldn't dream of doing it on Play Store, it's all trash, and even the stuff I go there to download specifically, I wish I didn't have to most of the time.

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#615

Post by xcrjm »

amluto wrote: post #612
jsheard wrote: post #12

They do the same thing on the Play Store, for example I just searched for Firefox and the first result is a sponsored spot for Opera. Does Apple do that on the App Store? A funnier example: searching for Amazon gives Temu as the first result. Searching for Temu gives Shein as the first result. Searching for Shein gives Shein as the first result! ...but only because they outbid everyone else for the ad spot on their o…

I would love to see trademark law changed to ban this practice. Google, etc should not be allowed to, in effect, charge money to avoid having one’s trademark become a search term for a competitor. Paying for ad slots to raise brand awareness is one thing, but a search for a trademark should resolve first to a valid holder of that trademark.

Why would that happen? Participating large businesses are completely fine with the existing practice. Sure, someone can bid on your trademark, but you can also bid on theirs and probably don't want to lose that ability.

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#616

Post by redserk »

xcrjm wrote: post #615
amluto wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to see trademark law changed to ban this practice. Google, etc should not be allowed to, in effect, charge money to avoid having one’s trademark become a search term for a competitor. Paying for ad slots to raise brand awareness is one thing, but a search for a trademark should resolve first to a valid holder of that trademark.

Why would that happen? Participating large businesses are completely fine with the existing practice. Sure, someone can bid on your trademark, but you can also bid on theirs and probably don't want to lose that ability.

Fortunately laws aren’t limited to be exclusive to large business interests and, at least occasionally, can be drafted with intent to benefit consumers in a market.

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#617

Post by Workaccount2 »

andrewmutz wrote: post #132
justapassenger wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very common story in industry. You start nimble, and disrupt bloated platforms. Then, as you grow, pressure grows and you also bloat. Then new company comes that brings nimble product and disrupt you. Search, TV->internet video, newspapers->internet - all of them go through those cycles.

You forgot the main source of pressure: you sell off equity in your company in exchange for cash. The buyers are buying the promise of future profits. At first, you still hold the vast majority of the voting rights, but over time you sell more and more and expectations rise and rise. Eventually you are an organization whose purpose is to return cash to shareholders in the near term. Hence a page full of ads, and no r…

>purpose is to return cash to shareholders in the near term.

I see this constantly repeated in anti-capitalist/anti-corporate rhetoric, but on the other side, shareholder meetings, finance conferences, financial service talks, no one ever wants this. Maybe the 20 year old stock bros on discord pumping penny stocks, but no serious shareholder of any company with a name you might recognize.

It happens, there are cases of it, but overwhelmingly the vibe is "long term stable profit generation".

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#618

Post by carlosjobim »

LorenDB wrote: post #58
beckthompson wrote: post #20

Its sad but I think at this point its kind of a safety issue not to use an ad blocker. Those results are not clearly ads and I've clicked on fake links in the past when they were.

You also should just stop using Google Search. DuckDuckGo is solid, or if you don't want to use search results from Bing's index, I've been very happy with Brave Search.

DuckDuckGo falls hard in quality when it comes to queries which are not in English. The only search engines who are good for those are Google and Kagi, in my opinion.

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#619

Post by Workaccount2 »

boringg wrote: post #111
justapassenger wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very common story in industry. You start nimble, and disrupt bloated platforms. Then, as you grow, pressure grows and you also bloat. Then new company comes that brings nimble product and disrupt you. Search, TV->internet video, newspapers->internet - all of them go through those cycles.

Wouldn't it be nice if some companies instead of ramping up ads for revenue passed along the value to consumers? Once they made their money back on the original investments convert to a lifestyle and provide a valuable product without squeezing every penny our of it and in the end killing it. One day maybe.

Google's customers are advertisers.

People overwhelmingly prefer ad-supported to subscription supported. Google would be a dramatically better service if everyone who used it paid. I really, really, cannot overstate that.

The internet sucks because users feel entitled to everything on it for free. They don't want ads and they don't want to pay subscriptions. uBlock origin, archive.is, and constant complaining about how the content sucks.

The internet is full of children with a naive understanding of how things work. The are so deluded that they even call on companies to simply provide them everything for free if they want to be "successful".

Re: Everything that's wrong with Google Search in one image

#620

Post by TheJoeMan »

miladyincontrol wrote: post #106
beckthompson wrote: post #20

Its sad but I think at this point its kind of a safety issue not to use an ad blocker. Those results are not clearly ads and I've clicked on fake links in the past when they were.

It absolutely is. I fear for the older generations and less tech minded people who google their bank, and get some random phishing site. Or similarly google what should be libre software and get some random malware on a site that looks 'close enough'. Lets call it what it is, a cancer, one that literally enables countless bad actors and purely for a search engine's own profit. In theory theres a time and place for ad…

What's odd is that the search engines, youtube, etc. get to claim the impartiality towards content applies to "impartiality" towards ads. I am younger, and I still almost got scammed trying to find a phone number to call a travel booking site. I called the number shown on Google, and they wanted to "verify my account" and triggered an email verification code. Only at the last minute did I realize it was an account takeover attempt. But that isn't Google perpetuating a crime?
Post reply on HN