Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not at all in the same boat as you; I do not and likely will never primarily rely on LLMs for information. But it's fascinating to hear that even folks who do don't find this approach useful.
As a concrete example, some advertising supported topics place search as an unwanted middleman, may as well ask a LLM directly. Consider "chocolate chip cookie recipe". Using google search, will return roughly infinite recipe sites. The sites were generated to spam AI generated recipes surrounded by advertisements. None of them are really any good because they were generated by a script and not looked at by a human u…
This is a wild take, as someone that cooks a lot, and largely from the internet (though I do own a lot of cookbooks)
The reality is that just googling for recipes was never good to begin with. People have been complaining about SEO spam and ads on recipe sites forever, but those recipes were always trash even before they got to the absurd state they're in now. Serious eats, bon appetit, food 52, smitten kitchen, chefsteps, all have great recipes. Some of these have paywalls, although you can get around them. Serious eats though is totally paywall free and has a pretty wide range of recipes. There are other sites for more niche cuisines.
You'll still have ads, and you'll still have a wall of text before the recipe. But the ads are slightly less obtrusive, and the wall of text on the quality sites is why those SEO techniques exist in the first place: a recipe that is just "list of ingredients + instructions" and doesn't include any context is ultimately a crapshoot. The thinking that goes into a recipe shows that you're not going to be wasting your time because it's been tested and optimized.