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.

Use another search provider then, it's what's called consumer discretion and historically has the best chance of effecting an outcome.

Okay Bot.

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.

#1 most butthurt response ever.

Nah, i just know a bot when I see one.

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.

mostly shit already. ymmv

Damn, thats fuckin' metal, bro.
Also, the text to gif gave me a flashback of ~15 years ago.

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.

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/

Man I miss the old internet..

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.

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.

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.