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

Google is dead. Where do we go now?

circusscientist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 873 posts

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#641

Post by instagraham »

SunshineTheCat wrote: post #61

I recently took someone to go and watch a hockey game. Been a little while but I personally played as a goalie myself. The person kept making the comment that she couldn't see/find the puck and it made it frustrating to watch. As a goalie, not being able to see the puck is pretty normal (especially with big bodies trying to screen you). What I told her was that what matters a lot more than where the puck is, is where…

I know this might seem reductive but when you say "look where everyone is looking", the answer hasn't really changed since the 2010s — it's our phones.

(and to some extent, monitors if you account for the amount of time 9-5 people spend on their work laptops or screens. desktop is not dead but that's another matter)

The hot apps are for now, chatbots and vertical shortform platforms. We know advertisers get much better bang for their buck marketing where the influencers are.

Google is "dead" because search advertising is much worse at figuring you out and showing you stuff when you're not necessarily looking for it. But Google can easily advertise where the eyeballs are - your phones.

We must remember that enshittification is an ongoing process and Google has the power to reach billions of people, one shitty update at a time.

From their POV, it definitely feels like a miss that they don't own a successful and dedicated social media platform. Maybe they will make another foray into it.

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#642

Post by stinkbeetle »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #625
stinkbeetle wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They didn't suggest men couldn't understand, they actually offered a way to help foster understanding by creating the false profile. The ones who won't understand are those who make no effort to understand, and that's quite reasonable to say. A woman's online safety relative to other spaces also misses the point about their online spaces being less safe than those of men; the suggestion wasn't that online spaces are…

[flagged]

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#643

Post by brabel »

ethbr1 wrote: post #590
hyperadvanced wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could argue (it certainly has been argued) that the ability for technology to dissolve the usually more coherent identities that we take on daily by granting unlimited role play, trolling, and exploration is simply too much for a lot of people, and makes it hard to maintain a coherent sense of self. This is especially true of people who are “internet addicts” - not that the designation means a whole lot as I’m he…

There's also the inconvenient truth that a very specific part of the world was online in the 1990s. Primarily more educated, more liberal, more wealthy. Turns out, when you hook the rest of the planet online, you get mass persuasion campaigns, fake genocide "reporting", and enough of an increase in ambient noise that coherent anonymous discourse becomes impossible. I mean, look at the comments on Fox News or politica…

The 1990s internet was definitely not more liberal! 4chan style forums were probably the rule. I can’t believe someone would say that, clearly you didn’t use the same internet that I did.

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#644

Post by giorgioz »

taikahessu wrote: post #35

Reminds me of a quote I once read of "marketing being a game of diminishing returns". When you find a working marketing solution, it's just a matter of time when it dries out, because of competitors and overall saturation.

Yes but it's possible that the marketing channel is very profitable before drying out. Also the less a channel is known the more it will take to reach saturation. So there might be channels that are very profitable and well hidden, the problem is that by definition it might be too hard/expensive to find them.

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#645

Post by euroderf »

nostrademons wrote: post #160
SunshineTheCat wrote: post #61

I recently took someone to go and watch a hockey game. Been a little while but I personally played as a goalie myself. The person kept making the comment that she couldn't see/find the puck and it made it frustrating to watch. As a goalie, not being able to see the puck is pretty normal (especially with big bodies trying to screen you). What I told her was that what matters a lot more than where the puck is, is where…

In my anecdotal experience, it's moved to private, trust-based channels: iMessage, WhatsApp, email, face-to-face interactions. Our 30-year bender of putting our lives online and blurring the public and the private has finally ended: people don't want to be online, don't trust social media, don't really trust any media, and are living simple local lives with a small circle of friends that they get together with regula…

> In my anecdotal experience, it's moved to private, trust-based channels

The Return of Content Curation. Peer-to-peer: research, retrieval, review.

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#646

Post by owisd »

NooneAtAll3 wrote: post #627
bluedino wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The person kept making the comment that she couldn't see/find the puck and it made it frustrating to watch. Lifelong hockey fan, I never understood this complaint. I believe it was FOX that did the 'highlight the puck' thing for a few years in the 1990's. You can't see the ball in American football, either. But you don't need to. The guy that's running and everyone is trying to tackle? He has the ball. Just like th…

> American football handegg*

The leading theory for the etymology of the “foot” in “football” is because it’s played on foot unlike, say, jousting or polo.

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#647

Post by zen4ttitude »

Most people now conduct searches through AI chat. We never trusted Google with our search terms, IP address linked to WiFi and cell towers surveys with Google trucks for cross referencing on Google map, browser fingerprinting, time of day pattern detection, mouse reaction time measurement for age estimation, cross referencing with economic profiling of neighbourhoods, income bracket estimation algorithms, interest profiling based on search terms, browsing breadcrumbs, social network tracking, etc. Now imagine the new powers of AI chat adding reasoning patterns, deep thinking and complete trust to the equation. Let us organise a disconnect day where you turn off your phone and Internet router and ISP box just to confuse the algorithms! Where do we go from here? We stay home and invite disconnected friends for a rare moment of statistically insignificant privacy.

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#648

Post by grugagag »

lovich wrote: post #621
grugagag wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed I was shadow banned on youtube (for comments). I have no idea what was the reason because I rarely comment and am very civil when I do. It doesn’t bother me much though, I was just curious how it happened.

I got a few strikes. They were in one of two main categories 1: my true beliefs 2: directly quoting the president I laugh at any current supporters of this admin who complain about censorship while this is happening and we’re doing shit like having multiple media companies being sued by the king left and right.

Yes, I agree with you. It’s become quite ridiculous. I expect things will turn for the worse and comments would be used against people in various ways if it’s not already happening, eg. being scanned on social media upon entering the US. Dark times…

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#649

Post by stpedgwdgfhgdd »

cookiengineer wrote: post #278
nostrademons wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my anecdotal experience, it's moved to private, trust-based channels: iMessage, WhatsApp, email, face-to-face interactions. Our 30-year bender of putting our lives online and blurring the public and the private has finally ended: people don't want to be online, don't trust social media, don't really trust any media, and are living simple local lives with a small circle of friends that they get together with regula…

I had a very interesting discussion with a friend today, where I was talking to her about the /r/golang thread about Rob Pike's comments to OpenAI and how the thread was full of bots talking with other bots. No idea why the density of bots was so high in that thread, it was kind of absurd to see. Then she said: "I know nobody that comments on online forums. Nobody would ever comment to strangers on the internet. It's…

This thread is working pretty decently. No bots so far

Re: Google is dead. Where do we go now?

#650

Post by crucialfelix »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #305
egypturnash wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone who was on Livejournal before G+ “invented” “Circles” had absolutely no problem with locking posts to “friends” (people they followed) or various “friends groups” that were subsets of their friends. It was fucking hilarious to see everyone say it was too hard on G+. Just two dropdowns right there on the new post page next to the main text field. Super simple. Creating and editing the groups was a pretty simp…

I still mourn G+. It was clearly put together by somebody who thought first and foremost about privacy. It made deciding who to share what with the central, most visible part of how it worked. And that's probably part of why it failed. Was it hard to choose? Nope. But I guarantee you that if Facebook added a little "hey, are you sure you want to share this post publicly with the whole world under your real name? Yes/…

G+ died because it was clown colored google product, not a communal space for people. It was technology without any aesthetic that made you want to be there.

Myspace was hilarious because it was such a mess. The people owned it, hacked the css. Every profile page was a messy real person.

Post reply on HN