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

951–960 of 961 posts

Re: Google changes its search box

#951

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #940

I've stopped using Google for "99%" of searches Many years ago they removed search operators that allowed for exact string matching. At that point I knew it was a circus Then I noticed Google started limiting the number of results for users who are "logged out" Then, several years ago, Google disabled public access to the cache At that point it was pretty clear where this was going When they started requiring Javascr…

In the early days of www search engines, it was common to brag about how many pages were searched to find the delivered results

Today, I don't think anyone pays attention to this anymore

We know that not all searches tap into the fuil index. All the focus is on the popular searches (largest audience for advertising). To the most make money, the search engine does not need to have the most comprehensive search, www users today do not shop for search engines, it just needs to be the "default search engine". Google has that taken care of, owning and controlling the www browser and the mobile OS, paying billions to be the default in other OS and partnering with other browsers

With LLMs we see companies today bragging about size. Grand claims like "the sum of all human knowledge". Also the scale of data centers and "compute"

But over time, will "AI" users care. Perhaps one company's "AI" will become the most popular and the "default" LLM. It will have the largest audience

And that's all that matters when the "business model" is data collection, surveillance and advertising services

Nothing new to see here

Re: Google changes its search box

#952

Post by imoverclocked »

illiac786 wrote: post #925
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from multiple sources, it can also get things wrong by combining information from different eras or just plain outdated advice.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…

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…

Sounds like a good question to ask Google (… only partially joking)

There are many primary sources depending on exactly what you are looking for. Shipping/port manifests or even stats are often findable. People in the region witnessing first-hand what is happening. If you are interested in political views then people who are in charge of policy and control resources in the region. Etc etc…

If you want a summary then, yes, you want a journalist or another source that looks at primary sources and has some knowledge of the region to start with to help give context to a specific situation.

Re: Google changes its search box

#953

Post by jinushaun »

pclowes wrote: post #22

I understand why they are doing this. My Google search usage is easily down 50%+. I doubt I am unique here. While there are times where I want pure search (Kagi, Old Google) I mostly use LLMs to search now and have them provide me links for source data. When I do use LLMs as a search engine I always want it integrated into my AI workflows with access to tools and scripts etc. I never want to have a conversation with…

Gone are the days where people are searching for websites. People are searching for answers. This trend started when Google Search added a calculator. I distinctly remember when Google started showing answers to simple questions like “what is the elevation of Everest” nearly 15 years ago. This is just the next evolution of that.

Re: Google changes its search box

#954

Post by illiac786 »

imoverclocked wrote: post #952
illiac786 wrote: post #925

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Sounds like a good question to ask Google (… only partially joking) There are many primary sources depending on exactly what you are looking for. Shipping/port manifests or even stats are often findable. People in the region witnessing first-hand what is happening. If you are interested in political views then people who are in charge of policy and control resources in the region. Etc etc… If you want a summary then,…

Just wanted to check you really meant primary source.

I don’t understand how you can learn anything then. News is off limits for you, history, sciences (unless you do the experiment yourself) as well. Math might be possible, at least you can check the proof yourself without having to travel anywhere. At least one can see the earth isn‘t flat by getting on a plane, but one has to squint a bit.

More seriously, to summarise, I don’t believe you live by this principle, you would live under a rock and I wouldn’t be chatting with you.

Re: Google changes its search box

#955

Post by imoverclocked »

illiac786 wrote: post #954
imoverclocked wrote: post #952

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a good question to ask Google (… only partially joking) There are many primary sources depending on exactly what you are looking for. Shipping/port manifests or even stats are often findable. People in the region witnessing first-hand what is happening. If you are interested in political views then people who are in charge of policy and control resources in the region. Etc etc… If you want a summary then,…

Just wanted to check you really meant primary source. I don’t understand how you can learn anything then. News is off limits for you, history, sciences (unless you do the experiment yourself) as well. Math might be possible, at least you can check the proof yourself without having to travel anywhere. At least one can see the earth isn‘t flat by getting on a plane, but one has to squint a bit. More seriously, to summa…

You have made a strange logical jump. By answering your question you seem to have gleaned more about me than seems reasonable.

I did state, “when I’m searching for something,” which (in my view) is different than simply being curious or watching/reading the news; One does need to be careful with what news they consume.

I usually don’t search for my news.

Re: Google changes its search box

#956

Post by illiac786 »

imoverclocked wrote: post #955
illiac786 wrote: post #954

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wanted to check you really meant primary source. I don’t understand how you can learn anything then. News is off limits for you, history, sciences (unless you do the experiment yourself) as well. Math might be possible, at least you can check the proof yourself without having to travel anywhere. At least one can see the earth isn‘t flat by getting on a plane, but one has to squint a bit. More seriously, to summa…

You have made a strange logical jump. By answering your question you seem to have gleaned more about me than seems reasonable. I did state, “when I’m searching for something,” which (in my view) is different than simply being curious or watching/reading the news; One does need to be careful with what news they consume. I usually don’t search for my news.

>one does need to be careful with what news they consume

100% agreed, it has become very difficult to stay balanced and not end up in some ideological echo chamber.

> “when I’m searching for something,” which (in my view) is different than simply being curious or watching/reading the news

yeah ok, that’s nifty. Still, one search requires traveling, meeting people to hear from their mouth the statement the book / newspaper reported about, for example. How many searches a year to you manage?

Re: Google changes its search box

#957

Post by imoverclocked »

illiac786 wrote: post #956
imoverclocked wrote: post #955

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have made a strange logical jump. By answering your question you seem to have gleaned more about me than seems reasonable. I did state, “when I’m searching for something,” which (in my view) is different than simply being curious or watching/reading the news; One does need to be careful with what news they consume. I usually don’t search for my news.

>one does need to be careful with what news they consume 100% agreed, it has become very difficult to stay balanced and not end up in some ideological echo chamber. > “when I’m searching for something,” which (in my view) is different than simply being curious or watching/reading the news yeah ok, that’s nifty. Still, one search requires traveling, meeting people to hear from their mouth the statement the book / news…

> Still, one search requires traveling

It doesn’t.

Re: Google changes its search box

#958

Post by jefftk »

arcatech wrote: post #377
jefftk wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not interested in a book, speaking tour, or podcast. I've never had consistent readership because I write about too many unrelated things. I blog because I have ideas I want to share; I don't feel at all ripped off.

And do you think that’s how everyone should feel? If not, how is it relevant to people not liking what Google is doing?

People are certainly welcome to feel a lot of different ways, not trying to be prescriptive here. My parent asked: "what exactly do I gain by allowing Googlebot to crawl my sites?" and I was describing what I get out of it, in the hope that others might feel similarly.

Re: Google changes its search box

#959

Post by muddi900 »

brokencode wrote: post #227
arionhardison wrote: post #218

I'm old enough to remember when "Google" was something that ended conversations. People — myself included — would literally say "Google it," the facts would be located, and that was that. Now that Google wants to be the conversation, I'm worried there will no longer be a bias-free source of information for the masses. This is all new, so I may be a bit hyperbolic, but the reason OpenAI introducing ads bothers me is t…

With sponsored links and aggressive SEO, “Google it” has been falling apart as a source of facts for a long time. There is an incredible gap in the search literacy between different users of Google. Some will accept what they find in the top links, no matter how dubious the source.

I wrote about this just over 5 years ago: https://chapra.blog/search-is-dead-352/

Google had already transformed the open web to the point of uselessness anyway.

Re: Google changes its search box

#960

Post by Andrex »

runako wrote: post #233
Andrex wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speculation: I could see a future where Google populates a footer on results with the website logos of the sources. Presumably, the new web will require users to memorize websites/brands and go directly to those sites if they see a lot of their results are being provided by one source. Websites may go back to being simply labors of love.

> Websites may go back to being simply labors of love. The situation may be even worse. Back in the labor of love era, at least webmasters could get feedback from readers. In the LLM era, readers may not even know that the site exists. Without feedback/community, the overall quality of those sites will decrease over time.

I've been mulling over your comment for a few days now.

On the old internet, "know one knows that you're a dog."

On the new internet, "know one knows (for sure) that you're an AI."

In a mixed discussion consisting of both AI and human participants, AI could generate interesting discussions and recite novel-sounding statements for ongoing ones. It doesn't sound plausible to me that an avalanche of profit-driven LLMs would even post -- I would think they'd be the lurkers. My take would be that LLMs actively participating, depending on the content they post, are also labors of love by some nerd out there trying to make the best LLM.

Drain all the profit motives and rent-seeking from the web, and even something like AI joining discussions doesn't sound scary.

Post reply on HN