This is ridiculous. It’s taken me a long time to switch to DuckDuckGo because when I get comfortable with something, it’s really difficult for me to switch, but if they’re going to totally change it (even if it appears to only be for certain search terms now), this is the last straw.

To make it worse, this is a re-search. The first time I searched the term, it asked me if I wanted an AI definition at the top of the page.

No, I want a fucking Wikipedia link. I realize it’s on the page, but come on.

This is the same search on DuckDuckGo:

  • eating3645@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 year ago

    I honestly do not see what you’re upset about, both search engines look like they did well here.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I hate all the unnecessary clutter.

        FYI, I use an adblocker to strategically remove annoying elements of a page (most will have a “click to remove” feature). You can probably do the same in whatever search you use, but I find it particularly useful on sites like Amazon or news sites.

      • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thats just how it is. You hate unnecessary clutter. So use duckduckgo. And google users may not want to open wikipedia they might simply want the single sentence defenition shown.

        Also there is nothing infuriating about this

        • wjrii@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          LOL, please subscribe to /c/ obscure and specific pet peeves that an odd human has confused with universal annoyances @ wtf.lemmy.

      • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same. That’s why I run my own with Searx-NG. It sends your queries out to several (DDG, Google, Bing, and more) and aggregates the results to you. No extra crap, no bs, just what you searched for.

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, that looks effective to me. If you had to scroll through two pages of 20 minute videos of in-depth reflection on eternal September, I might be with you.

    If you just wanted to see Wikipedia, go there and type it instead of Google.

  • onelikeandidie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    Although I think duckduckgo did a better job, I still don’t understand what is infuriating about this one. Google Search just wants to priorize showing you an excerpt from what you are looking for in case you are looking for a definition.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Doesn’t look like AI generated at all. They quoted Wiktionary to give the definition right at the top. Helpful

  • Chozo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, I want a fucking Wikipedia link.

    Add “Wikipedia” to your search term, then.

    It’s worth noting that Wikipedia has recently gotten down-ranked in Google’s search results. It’s rare to be the first result anymore, so just add that to your search terms.

    Or, alternatively, just go to Wikipedia and search directly on there. Remove the middleman if you already know what your final destination is going to be.

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because Google doesn’t want to to leave Google. Putting Wikipedia at the top encouraged people to click away

      So Google is now trying to deincentivize using the service they’re providing.

      • Aatube@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        it’s literally a giant link on the right-side knowledge panel. Plus the purpose of a search engine is for you to go to other sites, why wouldn’t it encourage people to click away if they don’t have it

  • Aatube@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t even see how this is “cluttered”. Do the two extra images really make that much of a difference to you? Plus isn’t Wikipedia always a link in the right side’s knowledge panel?

  • PrunesMakeYouPoop@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    God forbid I Google for information about anything that may be a product for sale, because all I’ll get is shopping links. It’s super annoying.

    • LinkOpensChest.wav
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Try searching something like “best longboards,” and you’ll get lost in an ocean of potential deathtraps from Amazon Affiliate blogs. I wish there was an extension to filter out all Amazon Affiliate links from any page. They’re an absolute plague

    • LinkOpensChest.wav
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a bit of clutter with the “related searches.” I always find that super unhelpful, and I wish there were a setting to disable it.

      It’s still superior to both examples posted by OP, though.

    • Whayle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for this! SearXNG is great, and took just a few minutes to spin up the Docker container.

  • Shurimal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This seems to be one of the rare times these days that google actually does a pretty good job getting you the result you seek for without clutter and ads.

    Also, use bangs to search on a specific site. If I want to search for an article on Wikipedia, I just type in "w ". d for DuckDuckGo, g for Google, b for Bing etc. I default to Brave primarily and DuckDuckGo secondarily.