Maybe I'm weird, but I find AI incredibly useful. I've barely used Google for over 2 years. I barely driven myself in a year. I haven't written code in 6 months.
I find it extremely useful. So much so that I am annoyed when I have to use it in a handicapped fashion such as on the phone. It makes me wonder why like 90% of the apps on my phone exist. I just want everything to be markdown files, skills, MCPs/API and then a nice TUI or voice to text.
Outside of specialized apps for work, I think ninety-percent of apps will probably go away and become MCP plugins. I would much prefer it.
Wow, I just asked Google A.I. mode some pointed questions about a site of mine which has been up and successful for about as long as Google and if Google had any guidance for creators/site owners. I had to push it but I got some remarkably frank answers and I am posting here as an FYI. "The accepted ideal case for Google is a highly consolidated, walled-garden internet where a small array of corporate media partners…
Why is this answer notable to you? Wouldn’t you be more surprised / concerned if the model refused to to criticize Google?
Wow, I just asked Google A.I. mode some pointed questions about a site of mine which has been up and successful for about as long as Google and if Google had any guidance for creators/site owners. I had to push it but I got some remarkably frank answers and I am posting here as an FYI. "The accepted ideal case for Google is a highly consolidated, walled-garden internet where a small array of corporate media partners…
Why is this answer notable to you? Wouldn’t you be more surprised / concerned if the model refused to to criticize Google?
Nilay Patel has been talking about "Google Zero" - the moment when Google effectively stops sending any traffic to other sites - for a few years now: https://www.theverge.com/24167865/google-zero-search-crash-h...
That article is not even two years old… “for a few years” make it sound like he saw it coming long before it started. He’s just describing a trend and its ineluctable destination.
But I do agree it will be or already is a paradigm shift. And a painful one.
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…
Let say I’m asking “what’s the latest in Hormuz?”. What is the primary source for this?
For most things I research, there is only secondary sources, reporting on an event, a trend…
Completely unrelated to AI, I buy and always bought recipe books in second hand bookstores. It has this vintage vibe, and not everything has to be kale. Downside is that some ingredients aren't easily reachable, but it doesn't happen that often.
My favorite are 50s and 60s recipe books. They use modern ingredients where appropriate, but mostly basic ingredients. Later and you start seeing "Use this new processed wunderfood ingredient substitute!" (70s-00s)
I kinda think everyone should have an old school "joy of cooking", where they have instructions on skinning rabbits and squirrels, just as a reference that things weren't always like this not even that long ago.
Nilay Patel has been talking about "Google Zero" - the moment when Google effectively stops sending any traffic to other sites - for a few years now: https://www.theverge.com/24167865/google-zero-search-crash-h...
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?
Nothing, but idea is that you wont be able to prevent it from happening.
In that case, the consequence will be that people will stop having webs. It is already happening with personal and niche sites.
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?
If your site is all about disseminating information (like Wikipedia), then Google would provide a free mirror of sorts. If your site is about your product, Google won't be able to serve the sign-up page from AI; the traffic would come your way. Same for a site that sell something: the traffic you're interested in would arrive at your checkout page. Paid-content sites and ad-supported sites are screwed though, on top…
> Google would provide a free mirror of sorts.
That is not what "free mirror" is. Like, that is not the same thing at all.
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…
While I agree in principle, I think it was inevitable. People been gaming SEO for so long that even with judicious use of search operators, it was getting harder to find the things I wanted (probably drowned in a sea of spam in such a way as to fall outside of the optimized search index). It _looks like_ the AI overview does not have this problem (yet...).