Is Google about to destroy the web?
Technology
65
Beiträge
37
Kommentatoren
233
Aufrufe
-
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.
Google disagrees. In fact, the company tells the BBC “Trust us, bro.”
Non-AI summary.
-
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.
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.
-
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.
Listen man, if thats what you think is best, you keep using them and try to effect change, good luck, im just not going to use services like that and have the problem solved for myself. Let me know when you've made something happen and I'll even apologise.
-
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.
No, it's Google changing their algorithm to feed you AI slop.
The first page and a half of Google results now is just AI-generated comparison websites. That's by design.
-
No, it's Google changing their algorithm to feed you AI slop.
The first page and a half of Google results now is just AI-generated comparison websites. That's by design.
Use another search provider then, it's what's called consumer discretion and historically has the best chance of effecting an outcome.
-
Use another search provider then, it's what's called consumer discretion and historically has the best chance of effecting an outcome.
Okay Bot.
-
Okay Bot.
#1 most butthurt response ever.
-
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.
The Man Who Killed Google Search
Wanna listen to this story instead? Check out this week's Better Offline podcast, "The Man That Destroyed Google Search," available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. UPDATE: Prabhakar has now been deposed as head of search, read here for more details. This is the story
Ed Zitron's Where's Your Ed At (www.wheresyoured.at)
I'm not a huge fan of Ed Zitron generally, he leans towards histrionic too much for my tastes, but he makes a compelling case here.
-
#1 most butthurt response ever.
Nah, i just know a bot when I see one.
-
Nah, i just know a bot when I see one.
Beep boop butthurt.
-
Damn, thats fuckin' metal, bro.
Also, the text to gif gave me a flashback of ~15 years 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.
More time per click is such a useless metric for the end user.
-
mostly shit already. ymmv
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.
-
Damn, thats fuckin' metal, bro.
Also, the text to gif gave me a flashback of ~15 years ago.feels like its 1998 and I'm listening to MTV while browsing the web on AOL with that gif, lol
-
mostly shit already. ymmv
Unpopular opinion: The missing business model for websites is killing the web. If there was a platform that would distribute a monthly fee to the websites we visit, the web would be much better.
50% could be allocated through traffic, 50% by choice. I could pay 20€ a month for example. Some would go to lemmy, some to my local newspaper, some to my favorite YouTube channels, authors or bloggers.
If enough people did this, investigative journalism would be funded, product testers wouldn't be reliant on sponsoring and hobbyists could gain serious funding without selling out.
-
Unpopular opinion: The missing business model for websites is killing the web. If there was a platform that would distribute a monthly fee to the websites we visit, the web would be much better.
50% could be allocated through traffic, 50% by choice. I could pay 20€ a month for example. Some would go to lemmy, some to my local newspaper, some to my favorite YouTube channels, authors or bloggers.
If enough people did this, investigative journalism would be funded, product testers wouldn't be reliant on sponsoring and hobbyists could gain serious funding without selling out.
I would love a if there was a standard websites would use to receive donations. An integrated browser addon that track what you visit and gives you a review before distributing funds after each month would be great. It should accumulate money to avoid transaction fees for tiny amounts.
-
Unpopular opinion: The missing business model for websites is killing the web. If there was a platform that would distribute a monthly fee to the websites we visit, the web would be much better.
50% could be allocated through traffic, 50% by choice. I could pay 20€ a month for example. Some would go to lemmy, some to my local newspaper, some to my favorite YouTube channels, authors or bloggers.
If enough people did this, investigative journalism would be funded, product testers wouldn't be reliant on sponsoring and hobbyists could gain serious funding without selling out.
This sounds exactly like what Brave is/was supposed to be/could have been.
-
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.
Don't forget to put your website on a webring!
https://
.ws/ -
Don't forget to put your website on a webring!
https://.ws/Man I miss the old internet..
-
Man I miss the old internet..
Someone posted this the other day: https://goodinternetmagazine.com/building-a-slow-web/
I really liked the idea so I quickly made my personal site and put it on the indie webring. It's a tiny community but it's there.
