Just tried it:
Q: What is the best summoner 0 button build for d4 s13 necro
A: Something went wrong and an AI response wasn't generated.
Amazing product. Really frontier search experience. Thanks Google!
Google changes its search box
831–840 of 961 posts
Re: Google changes its search box
#832Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kagi is better. Kagi is damn good, as much a revelation as the Google of old. Not free, though.
As a user and fan of kagi, the problem with kagi is that it reveals how badly degraded the web is. The vast majority of original content is now in one or another social network or on discord. News articles are an exception, though the news has its own problems. Some wikis still exist and are actively maintained, of course, but not a ton. If it's a topic that's academically studied you might find information in papers…
That is your signal to make a website on that topic and get it indexed by Kagi! Or Marginalia.
Re: Google changes its search box
#833It’s diverged quite a bit from the original: ... Search the web using Google! 10 results 30 results 100 results Index contains ~25 million pages (soon to be much bigger) ... https://web.archive.org/web/19981111183552/http://google.sta...
>
What a nostalgic classic.
Re: Google changes its search box
#834Earlier 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.
The other day I found a comment here on HN and I wanted to know if it's true. I asked Gemini and here is the conversation https://gemini.google.com/share/2c1089ac6fd6 You can't do something like this with search.
Yes you can. All you did there was paste in 9 search queries and get 9 results at once.
Re: Google changes its search box
#835Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I never want to have a conversation with a website that is geared towards advertising me products. yeah man good thing LLMs are structurally incapable of being incentivized to sell you a product or render referral links, this is surely future-proof
Or subtly misrepresent politically inconvenient facts, or gently steer you into opinions based on a synthesis of broker data and demographic info, or quietly flag you in some database column due to exhibiting dissident-adjacent ideas or behaviors, or... Yeah, they probably aren't doing (most of) these now, but it doesn't take much mental energy to extrapolate once you factor nearly every other tech company's ethical…
I remember a few years ago memes were going around about how ChatGPT responded differently to "do Israelis deserve human rights?" ("Of course! Everyone deserves human rights...") and "do Palestinians deserve human rights?" ("While everyone deserves human rights, it's complicated... ")
Re: Google changes its search box
#836Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I never want to have a conversation with a website that is geared towards advertising me products. yeah man good thing LLMs are structurally incapable of being incentivized to sell you a product or render referral links, this is surely future-proof
My thought here is that there are many. They have proven to be commodities in most use cases. As soon as one gets annoying, expensive, advertiser heavy etc. you just rip it out and replace it with the other one. AFAICT there is zero lock-in or moat. I often am able to switch models in one click or command. This is why all the LLM providers are desperate for a product layer/comprehensive tool set. Sure maybe they all…
That used to be the situation with search engines, too...
Re: Google changes its search box
#837Earlier quoted context omitted.
I write a lot of scrapers. Both of those are pretty trivial to bypass at scale.
What about not at scale? I find it wild that "at scale" we can bypass anti-bot measures, but just "normal" internet use (i.e Non-Google Browser or VPN) will throw a million captchas at you. cgnat is pretty bad too.
Not at scale, what you’re seeing are a tiny tiny fraction of the potential captchas that can be thrown at you. Normally “we have seen this cookie before”, or “this browser does not have webdriver fingerprints” is sufficient to not get a captcha.
The big issue you sidestep not at scale is you can come from a single, residential IP with a good reputation.
Mandatory captchas for simply viewing a page are rare - most are saved for high impact actions like account creation.
When this does happen for a simple page view, AI is extremely good at solving basic captchas - especially basic “click the box” captchas.
If you don’t want to pay for AI, there are decaptcha services where someone in Southeast Asia solves the captcha for fractions of a penny. Save the cookies after a successful solve and you’re probably good in the future.
If you don’t want to pay for someone to solve a simple check the box captcha a little bit of attention and some properly simulated clicking (IE not a JavaScript injected event) will often work. Just don’t click literally the exact middle, fuzz the coordinates and you’re good.
Re: Google changes its search box
#838> As people have realized just how much more Search can do for them, they’re searching more than ever before — so much so that last quarter, we saw queries reach an all-time high.
...a high search volume tells me that maybe users aren't able to find what they're actually looking for, thereby needing more searches.
Re: Google changes its search box
#839Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I’ve experienced the opposite. I get good summaries with links for original sources when something seeems off, which it almost never does. I also like that I can glance to see where the data came from.
Several months ago, I was getting hallucinations and silly answers, like Jaco Pastoreous being the bass player for Metallica.
but lately it’s been great. Especially for technical syntax stuff, like asking for syntax on a jq command, or sal syntax, or something trivial like movie casts members….
Edit: I also assume there’s now some pre-processing filter to retrieve answers from a cache or something, because I’m getting pretty long answers very quickly….
Re: Google changes its search box
#840Earlier quoted context omitted.
True in large part, but they've been diversifying their providers in the expectation that Google shut everybody out.
The thing is, they were diversifying with Russia's Yandex... Which is worse for some.
Yes yes, they use Yandex for a little bit. They use lots of providers.
At this point with Google contributing so much to the Trump administration, I'm not sure which is worse.