Skip to content

Is Google about to destroy the web?

Technology
86 60 177
  • When the websites that the AI search is sourcing information from cease to exist because they don't get enough traffic, how will AI search continue to source information?

    This isn't a hard concept....

  • Ydes but it will not "destroy the web"

    What do you imagine 'destroying the web' looks like if not killing off huge swaths of websites that relied on traffic/ads to sustain themselves? Do you imagine a man has to bleed all the way out before we can say he's going to die, or is it sufficient to look at the severity of the wound to critical systems in his body and determine that he is probably going to die?

  • When the websites that the AI search is sourcing information from cease to exist because they don't get enough traffic, how will AI search continue to source information?

    This isn't a hard concept....

    It might be harder than you think....

    What kind of information are you talking about? Let's be specific. The phone number for a garden center or how a rocket engine works? This won't affect every search the same way. This is actually a fantastically complex question and we'll only really see what happens when it does.

  • We have good options to replace Google Search. What good options exist to replace search on Google Maps?

    Edit: Also, I think they make most of their money off of ad-sense adds embedded in apps and websites. It'll be very difficult to weed all those out. I just use uBlock on Firefox and Blockada on Android.

    Open Street Maps, or any fork from it. You can also purchase a modern road atlas for basically nothing. Alternatively, people do make navigation units for cars, that you can purchase. Life is completely possible, with relatively little inconvenience if you want to separate yourself from Big Tech. I write down the directions and just follow street signs. You don't want to rely on things like GPS, because it destroys your ability to commit identifying markers to memory. You can glance at the screen and glance at the road in front of you. But that stops you from being able to commit the experience from memory. Smart Tech and the offloading of our mental faculties to technology has made all of us

    1. Way too overconfident in our ability to comprehend, review and parse information.

    2. Decimated our attention spans and will most likely see a whole new type of cognitive decline.

    Sorry for the tangent. But yeah, there's options there. With or without the tech.

  • It might be harder than you think....

    What kind of information are you talking about? Let's be specific. The phone number for a garden center or how a rocket engine works? This won't affect every search the same way. This is actually a fantastically complex question and we'll only really see what happens when it does.

    It's really not. You seem to be insinuating they'll take a nuanced approach and treat different types of websites differently, but there is no reason to believe that is the case, and it's not what they've been doing thus far. Espousing that Google has a sustainable long term plan for the internet that we're too stupid to understand just makes you look ridiculous tbh

  • Fuck them. Use Qwant

    Isn’t that bing?

  • It's really not. You seem to be insinuating they'll take a nuanced approach and treat different types of websites differently, but there is no reason to believe that is the case, and it's not what they've been doing thus far. Espousing that Google has a sustainable long term plan for the internet that we're too stupid to understand just makes you look ridiculous tbh

    You've misunderstood me (let's just say "not deliberately" for a moment). What I'm saying is that regardless of what Google does in terms of long term plans or nuanced anything not all searches are equal. Neither you nor I can say at this point how this will shake out. Also, what have you eaten today? You know what you're like when you don't eat...

  • To avoid misunderstandings: FUCK GOOGLE

    For those who didn't get it... GOOGLE IS SHIT, DON'T USE!

  • You've misunderstood me (let's just say "not deliberately" for a moment). What I'm saying is that regardless of what Google does in terms of long term plans or nuanced anything not all searches are equal. Neither you nor I can say at this point how this will shake out. Also, what have you eaten today? You know what you're like when you don't eat...

    I understood you perfectly, made clear by the fact you're doing it again. You're trying to deflect from the obvious mechanics of this endeavor (let’s just say “not deliberately” for a moment) by saying it's too nuanced and complicated for our tiny pea brains to understand even though it's completely obvious when you use your brain for 5 seconds.

  • We have good options to replace Google Search. What good options exist to replace search on Google Maps?

    Edit: Also, I think they make most of their money off of ad-sense adds embedded in apps and websites. It'll be very difficult to weed all those out. I just use uBlock on Firefox and Blockada on Android.

    OsmAnd. There's also a new fork of Organic Maps called CoMaps after Organic had some drama. A bunch of Organic devs left and forked it into CoMaps.

  • Got a machine web

    It’s better than the rest

    Green to Red

    Machine web

    I'm gonna say it.

    Of the buttrock bands that followed Nirvana's model,... Bush was the best one, for three albums anyway.

  • Google says a new AI tool on its search engine will rejuvenate the internet. Others predict an apocalypse for websites. One thing is clear: the current chapter of online history is careening towards its end. Welcome to the "machine web".

    The web is built on a simple bargain – websites let search engines like Google slurp up their content, free of charge, and Google Search sends people to websites in exchange, where they buy things and look at adverts. That's how most sites make money.

    An estimated 68% of internet activity starts on search engines and about 90% of searches happen on Google. If the internet is a garden, Google is the Sun that lets the flowers grow.

    This arrangement held strong for decades, but a seemingly minor change has some convinced that the system is crumbling. You'll soon see a new AI tool on Google Search. You may find it very useful. But if critics' predictions come true, it will also have seismic consequences for the internet. They paint a picture where quality information could grow scarcer online and large numbers of people might lose their jobs. Optimists say instead this could improve the web's business model and expand opportunities to find great content. But, for better or worse, your digital experiences may never be the same again.

    On 20 May 2025, Google's chief executive Sundar Pichai walked on stage at the company's annual developer conference. It's been a year since the launch of AI Overviews, the AI-generated responses you've probably seen at the top of Google Search results. Now, Pichai said, Google is going further. "For those who want an end-to-end AI Search experience, we are introducing an all-new AI Mode," he said. "It's a total reimagining of Search."

    You might be sceptical after years of AI hype, but this, for once, is the real deal.

    "about to destroy the web" ???

    Where have you been these last 10 years? It's been getting worse for a long time, even before AI. It's just getting worse quicker now.

  • Totally agree with your sentiment. The web is changing. And most people hate change. That's why we see everyone hating on AI right now.

    In reality, LLMs are really useful and convenient. I use them every day. We and the internet just need to adapt to it. I don't have a good solution for it now.

  • For those who didn't get it... GOOGLE IS SHIT, DON'T USE!

    What’s wrong with Google? AI answers are pretty convenient.

  • Qwant was what let me switch off goog. I still use gmaps unfort my experiments with open source maps were failures.

  • What’s wrong with Google? AI answers are pretty convenient.

    conveniently wrong, yeah

  • Google says a new AI tool on its search engine will rejuvenate the internet. Others predict an apocalypse for websites. One thing is clear: the current chapter of online history is careening towards its end. Welcome to the "machine web".

    The web is built on a simple bargain – websites let search engines like Google slurp up their content, free of charge, and Google Search sends people to websites in exchange, where they buy things and look at adverts. That's how most sites make money.

    An estimated 68% of internet activity starts on search engines and about 90% of searches happen on Google. If the internet is a garden, Google is the Sun that lets the flowers grow.

    This arrangement held strong for decades, but a seemingly minor change has some convinced that the system is crumbling. You'll soon see a new AI tool on Google Search. You may find it very useful. But if critics' predictions come true, it will also have seismic consequences for the internet. They paint a picture where quality information could grow scarcer online and large numbers of people might lose their jobs. Optimists say instead this could improve the web's business model and expand opportunities to find great content. But, for better or worse, your digital experiences may never be the same again.

    On 20 May 2025, Google's chief executive Sundar Pichai walked on stage at the company's annual developer conference. It's been a year since the launch of AI Overviews, the AI-generated responses you've probably seen at the top of Google Search results. Now, Pichai said, Google is going further. "For those who want an end-to-end AI Search experience, we are introducing an all-new AI Mode," he said. "It's a total reimagining of Search."

    You might be sceptical after years of AI hype, but this, for once, is the real deal.

    No, but not for want of trying.

  • We have good options to replace Google Search. What good options exist to replace search on Google Maps?

    Edit: Also, I think they make most of their money off of ad-sense adds embedded in apps and websites. It'll be very difficult to weed all those out. I just use uBlock on Firefox and Blockada on Android.

    What are good Google alternatives that don’t rely on Google or Bing?

  • Google says a new AI tool on its search engine will rejuvenate the internet. Others predict an apocalypse for websites. One thing is clear: the current chapter of online history is careening towards its end. Welcome to the "machine web".

    The web is built on a simple bargain – websites let search engines like Google slurp up their content, free of charge, and Google Search sends people to websites in exchange, where they buy things and look at adverts. That's how most sites make money.

    An estimated 68% of internet activity starts on search engines and about 90% of searches happen on Google. If the internet is a garden, Google is the Sun that lets the flowers grow.

    This arrangement held strong for decades, but a seemingly minor change has some convinced that the system is crumbling. You'll soon see a new AI tool on Google Search. You may find it very useful. But if critics' predictions come true, it will also have seismic consequences for the internet. They paint a picture where quality information could grow scarcer online and large numbers of people might lose their jobs. Optimists say instead this could improve the web's business model and expand opportunities to find great content. But, for better or worse, your digital experiences may never be the same again.

    On 20 May 2025, Google's chief executive Sundar Pichai walked on stage at the company's annual developer conference. It's been a year since the launch of AI Overviews, the AI-generated responses you've probably seen at the top of Google Search results. Now, Pichai said, Google is going further. "For those who want an end-to-end AI Search experience, we are introducing an all-new AI Mode," he said. "It's a total reimagining of Search."

    You might be sceptical after years of AI hype, but this, for once, is the real deal.

    That fucking AI thing absolutely sucks for anything factual. I’m a journalist and noticed that it gleefully listed all sorts of factual errors in that AI summary. Stuff that you can see correctly on the original pages, but it somehow manages to misinterpret everything and shows incorrect information.

    And knowing how lazy people are these days, most will happily accept Google’s incorrect information as fact. It’s making me very, very nervous for the future.

  • Quit.... Using... Google... Search

    What’s the best alternative, in your opinion? I’ve tried Bing and DuckDuckGo, but both showed me worse results for my particular searches.

    I just want classic Google Search back, before everything got turned to shit. But I fear that doesn’t really exist since there’s such an economic incentive behind how search engines rank and show results.

  • 34 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Telegram, the FSB, and the Man in the Middle

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    52 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    31 Aufrufe
    R
    You can be seen from a kilometer away, pots ))
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 2 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 24 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    S
    Said it the day Broadcom bought them, they're going to squeeze the smaller customers out. This behavior is by design.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    65 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 80 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    87 Aufrufe
    lanusensei87@lemmy.worldL
    Consider the possibility that you don't need to be doing anything wrong besides existing to be persecuted by a fascist regime.
  • 220 Stimmen
    99 Beiträge
    250 Aufrufe
    G
    In highrises with lots of stops and users, it uses some more advanced software to schedule the optimal stops, or distribute the load between multiple lifts. A similar concept exists for HDD controllers, where the read write arm must move to different positions to load data stored on different plates and sectors, and Repositioning the head is a slow and expensive process that cuts down the data transfer rate.