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

Google changes its search box

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 961 posts

Re: Google changes its search box

#771

Post by footy »

Yokohiii wrote: post #238
imoverclocked wrote: post #37

I don't trust facts from LLMs. When I am searching for something, I usually want to find primary sources. As soon as a number is involved, I do my best to not even look at the AI output. Even though the result is often good and combines information from multiple sources, it can also get things wrong by combining information from different eras or just plain outdated advice. AFAICT, without primary sources, the result…

Even before the AI era I slowly became less and less successful with google searches. Everything - non trivial / specific - that I looked for turned into a chore and I quickly gave up. LLMs, that can supply valid links, give me a completely different variety of results. Either I am too dumb to search manually, too impatient or google search is just broken, but Gemini usually gives me something I can work with. I just…

Google has been going downhill for a decade now.

I've been paying for Kagi for like four years. I like it but also resent that it's something I pay for now when I remember how good Google was 20 years ago.

Re: Google changes its search box

#772

Post by duskdozer »

conradfr wrote: post #721
ekidd wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which as some running a website raises a fascinating question. If Google is just going to crawl my sites and present information as an AI summary on their site, then what exactly do I gain by allowing Googlebot to crawl my sites?

Who can lobby the EU for the right to abstain a website from being used for training data?

It should have been a clear extension of the intent of existing copyright/licensing that training would be disallowed without consent, but "move fast and break things"/"possession is nine-tenths of the law" win out

Re: Google changes its search box

#773

Post by duskdozer »

daemin wrote: post #572
try-working wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's Google making way for its disruptor. We'll see who that is. Imagine a search engine that just presents search results. Groundbreaking.

More likely you're going to get a search engine which returns results as short 5 second AI generated video clips with an infinite scroll. (Torment Nexus rules apply here)

As it turns out I found out some people use tiktok as a search engine. How exactly, I am not sure.

Re: Google changes its search box

#774

Post by intended »

salomonk_mur wrote: post #530
nicbou wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has reduced traffic to my website by around 65%. I live from that website. My income is a function of the traffic it gets. I spent 9 years of my life putting hard-earned information on the internet, and now big tech uses it to enrich themselves while putting me out of work. Even my backup plan - software development - is being devalued to hell. It's so damn depressing. We'll get the internet that we deserve.

To be fair, the traffic you had was mostly routed by them as well. Google giveth, Google taketh away.

Google giveth jack shit here.

Google users wanted to find that info. Google served its users.

Re: Google changes its search box

#775

Post by cafebabbe »

techterrier wrote: post #751
RealCodingOtaku wrote: post #724

Most of all websites will lose their traffic, some already did. - People using the search console see the drop - Product owners scratch their head - Investors backing out because not having many visitors - Small bloggers adding more ads because their revenue is dropping - Sponsors backing out from their blogs because it's loosing more visitors - Small web crumbling - People google what is happening - Google says 'The…

hello, smol webber here (wildlife photos), can confirm the drop off is happening. I dont care about my own site tho, its just a convenient place to put things. Id be doing exactly the same for 1 user or 1 million users. https://dombarker.co.uk/

Amazing pictures, thanks for sharing!

Re: Google changes its search box

#776

Post by carlosjobim »

lyu07282 wrote: post #574
carlosjobim wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That translates to "Force Google to give money to these specific organizations and newspapers which EU leaders wish to benefit". It won't help any individuals who has made great websites with important and popular information.

Well that's just an example, You could mandate an API to allow bots pay their fair share; could ban google from using content it stole without compensation; could shatter google into a thousand pieces.. There are music rights organizations with small time artists to huge celebrities, they are strong organizations that collect revenue from big platforms and redistribute it to all artists as well. Lots and lots of ways…

It's possible to do that easily: By putting your content behind a paywall. Google can't access that legally. That's how book authors have won in court against both Google and the AI giants.

That also requires new ways to think about how you sell content online. Mass syndication has been very successful for music and video content, and much more.

Re: Google changes its search box

#778

Post by steveBK123 »

johnny_canuck wrote: post #537
thelastgallon wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of Walmarts squeezing strategy with all the manufacturers. Business with us at the price we say or out of business.

But ultimately that strategy is good for the consumer right? In this context, if Google is going to give me the recipe without having to scroll through the story, that seems like a win to me. The ad-revenue driven Internet of web 2.0 is finally dead and I'm not sure I'm all that sad.

Not really good for consumers in the long term. Creates a monopsony (monopoly on the buyer side instead of seller side) in the supply chain, with all the same negative externalities to competition.

Same reason its not good to have a "company town" where 1 company is the major employer to 50% of the workers.

Re: Google changes its search box

#780

Post by b112 »

Gareth321 wrote: post #761
yard2010 wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the problem with the current monopolistic system, the money won't go down the stream, it's like a dam. One big dam owned by a few people is worse than many small dams

I agree. For what it's worth, I think Google's business model is in trouble. They're putting in heroic effort to stay relevant during this shift to AI search, but how does their advertising model work when people expect summarised and accurate information instead of scrolling pages of ads? The search space is actually not that unhealthy. There are competitors. They just lack the reach of Google. These competitor will…

Hanging my comment here, not blaming the parent poster, it's just relevant...

All the "AI search" I've tried is far less relevant than a proper search, using search engines without it seems much faster and more relevant.

Whenever I get AI search results, its summaries lack substance, are often just plain wrong, and so on. When I check, it's often usong the wrong aggregate data to return results.

Search engines these days, traditional ones, have been hobbled by targeting the lowest common denominator. They drop search terms, alias them (eg, Joe=Joseph,Josephene, Jodiene), and thus return endless bad results.

Using "web" search on Google, for example, putting all search terms in quotes, helps enormously. If searching for Joe Baker, you don't want aliased responses.

My point is, AI is yet another abstracted layer. It not only aliases things, it halucinates, and further, it doesn't even show the context it simply summarizes.

It's the next layer of crappiness.

As a side note, there os a product in my home country called the Swiffer. It is like a broom, but uses disposable sticky paper instead of broom bristles and a scoop.

Point is, it isn't very environmentally friendly. I weirdly see environmentalists using it, instead of just a good old broom.

And now I see environmentalists using AI for search. What? Why! The sheer additional power and cost, all the new datacenters, hardware, just for what??

Even of one believes it is mildly better (which it isn't, if you use traditional search properly), are you now replacing your broom with a swiffer?!

The amount of environmentalism that goes out the window, for convenience, astonishes me.

Post reply on HN