• haverholm@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    ·
    2か月前

    I’m more surprised that people still use Google search at all after the years of enshittification — first the SEO crap, then “personalized search” bubbles, and finally the “AI” idiocy. Even shouting questions down a wishing well seems more productive at this point.

    • leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      112
      ·
      2か月前

      Not to sound confrontational, but you’re way too focused on your - likely rather advanced - usage.

      90% of people search for very simple stuff. They want to know the weather or want to know about that new movie they don’t quite remember the name of. And for that use case, Google is perfectly serviceable. And since people are used to it, for example by it being the default on most platforms, they use it.

      A lot of market leaders are objectively a bad choice, but they’re a known brand. Coca cola, McDonald’s, Oracle, etc.

      • haverholm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        2か月前

        I don’t think you sound confrontational, but neither do I consider my internet searching particularly advanced. A lot of my searches are exactly what you describe, and a lot is trying to find a good research rabbit hole to go down. Call me curious.

        I’m just sceptical, primarily of Google Search’s inroads into surveillance monetisation and effective monopoly. For the same reasons I am as critical of the other “market leaders” you mention; I don’t consider the ability to inspire brand loyalty in millions of consumers to sell crap products a quality 🤷

        • kemsat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          2か月前

          I would honestly consider anyone that uses Lemmy or the Fediverse to be more advanced than the average user.

      • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2か月前

        google is perfectly serviceable

        I would go even one step further. For dumb little things like a movie or song you can’t remember, or a factoid to win an argument amongst friends the AI summaries are really helpful.

        • fishos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          2か月前

          Yeah no. Just had someone IRL try to use the AI summary to prove something that was blatantly false.

          Even more fitting: factoid means something believed to be true, but is false. It’s not a “cute little tidbit of info” like you used it as.

          So yeah, AI summaries are full of factoids, you are correct.

          • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            2か月前

            I actually did use “factoid” correctly here. According to the Cambridge dictionary the Definition is

            an interesting piece of information

            And that’s exactly what I use it for. I’m not talking about debating economic policy on national television (but tbf, the ai summary probably does a better job than the talking heads haha) but just stupid little things you “”“debate”“” with your friends.

            Some examples Ive used it for recently.

            “Were the cars in mad max real cars” and heres the response

            Yes, the vehicles in the Mad Max films, especially Fury Road, are based on real, modified cars, rather than CGI or camera effects, with over 150 real cars used in the filming of Fury Road. Here’s a more detailed look

            And then it had some details about some of the big cars. And then it linked to articles like this one or this one

            Or “how much does a da Vinci (surgery robot) cost?”, and heres it’s answer:

            The cost of a da Vinci surgical robot typically ranges from $1.5 million to $2.5 million.

            And then had some details of different models of da Vinci machines. But it also linked to this source and this source

            And those are just two of the recent searches I have in my search history. For stupid factoids like that it’s really great. For anything more nuanced or complicated than that it falls apart.

            And yeah it has incorrect information sometimes. But you know what else gets incorrect information? Me when I drunkenly skim the first article that pops up while my friends drunkenly yell over each other. So id say it washes out.

            • fishos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2か月前

              that’s funny, cus the AI summary for “what is a factoid” told me it’s an incorrectly believed idea. So which is it? Is the AI correct and you’re wrong, or is the AI incorrect and you’re still wrong?

                • fishos@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2か月前

                  Whooooosh

                  If the AI summary is incorrect, then his point about trusting AI is incorrect. If the AI summary is correct, then it contradicts what he said the definition is and he is once again incorrect. Literally, no matter what, he’s wrong. It’s was a fun way to show the absurdity of blindly trusting AI. His logic itself is flawed.

        • Ulrich@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2か月前

          or a factoid to win an argument amongst friends the AI summaries are really helpful.

          People have tried to use these against me already. It’s not helpful because all they get is a mouthful of how shitty and chronically incorrect AI summaries are.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2か月前

      Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo, etc all suffer the same problems. I’d love to hear other alternatives (and I don’t mean alternatives like searx that is little more than lipstick on a pig and proxies search results from said engines).

    • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2か月前

      Google supports searching “specific phrases”, -excluding_words, +ensuring_keywords, and whatever * is. I havent found any other indexers that allow me to make use of searches with that level of detail, which is often the only way you can find specific things these days.

      • shikitohno@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2か月前

        Duckduckgo does plenty with its advanced search operators, which are pretty similar to Google’s. * is a wildcard, meaning if you were to search c*y, results word return something including a sequence beginning with ‘c’ and ending with ‘y’, but having any sequence of characters in between them.

      • Nelots@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2か月前

        Pretty sure Yandex at least allows for all of those search operators. As far as meta search engines, basically anything that uses google’s results like Startpage will also likely support them.

    • madthumbs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2か月前

      Left out shadow banning raw footages on YT while front page promoting the same footage with heavy edits and narration that lied about what happened (‘see no resisting’). -Leading to riots, increased racism, civil unrest, anti-cop sentiment, innocent lives, jobs, and property lost, etc. All to distract us from a racist genocide they support.

      Yandex is the only search I’m aware of that passes tests (using verifiable facts) on the subject. -Grok the only AI.