Google says adding more AI to its search engine will rejuvenate the internet. Others predict an apocalypse for websites. One thing is clear: this era of online history is closing.

mostly shit already. ymmv

  • @Opisek@lemmy.worldEnglish
    8•1 day ago

    I recommend Kagi. It is a search engine with absolutely no tracking or ads, AI slop filter, an in-house index and a cute doggo. It’s a paid search engine (which means you pay with money not with data), but you can give it a try with 300 free searches with no strings attached.

  • @A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.worldEnglish
    15•2 days ago

    We’re soon going to end up back in the early/mid 90s where the only way to find something is via a internet yellowpages… only this time, not because search engines dont exist yet, but because they are completely worthless garbage.

  • Alphane MoonEnglish
    16•2 days ago

    Google disagrees. In fact, the company tells the BBC that AI Overviews have been good for the web, and AI Mode will be no different. Google insists these features send users to “a greater diversity of websites” and the traffic is “higher quality” because people spend more time on the links they click.

    However, the company hasn’t provided data to back up these claims.

    This is how we know they are lying.

  • @Crackhappy@lemmy.worldEnglish
    16•2 days ago

    I haven’t used Google Search in quite a while. It’s frankly unusable for finding any useful information for someone like me.

  • @Korkki@lemmy.mlEnglish
    8•3 days ago

    Google search engine has been shit for a decade or more. Wasn’t there some document that it was made so by purpose, because there was no incentive to improve it becuse there was no real competition or the competition was just a front-end to google.

  • @RaptorBenn@lemmy.worldEnglish
    -4•2 days ago

    Blaming google is like blaming the gun for killing someone, google gonna do what google gonna do, it’s up to the consumer to effect change through attention.

    • @stellargmite@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3•2 days ago

      To a degree perhaps. It has also monopolised industries that feed into each other. Even if you choose not to use their consumer products, you are being used by them as the product in these industries if you use the web at all, which is most of their business model. That isn’t consumer choice. Political intervention is one hope, which in some countries I guess there is some consumer power over, if consumers were to collectivise to a degree more valuable than the lobbying power of this monster. The internet was turned into the yellowpages with sharp teeth by google .

      • @RaptorBenn@lemmy.worldEnglish
        -3•2 days ago

        Oh yes, political intervention, that’ll work, no chance of that turning out worse than what we have now.

        How about taking responsibility and just not using services that require it. And I dont care if that’s a disadvantage to some, that’s the cost.

        • @stellargmite@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3•2 days ago

          The two approaches you mention need not be mutually exclusive. I ditched google services more than 10 years ago, while loving somewhere they did some truly despicable antidemocratic things. but so what? They’re a corporation. There are political lobby groups, privacy foundations and advocacy groups you can contribute to. Despite being respectfully evangelical with those around me, most other than a fringe really don’t care enough about this. Doesn’t mean I’ll stop. I will still suggest alternatives. They’re my principles. you’re working in their interest if you tell your allies to give up. I understand and share the cynicism around political process especially in democratic nations with disappointing levels of corporate influence over legislation, we can only engage in it best we can, as well as exerting our rights as consumers. The critical mass required may seem insurmountable but negativity toward those effectively on your side is not going to help either.

        • @Chulk@lemmy.mlEnglish
          3•2 days ago

          Political intervention is what started Google, so I don’t see the problem.

          How about taking responsibility and just not using services that require it.

          Google has shaped the web into what it is over decades so that they could maintain their position of power. This is the very essence and purpose of a monopoly. Yet here you are trying to blame anything but the monopoly for the monopoly’s existence.

          Nothing like convincing hundreds of millions of people to abandon a company rather than put any pressure on the small group of greedy people who own it.