zlacker

[return to "Is Google’s 20-year search dominance about to end?"]
1. Rosana+K9[view] [source] 2023-02-08 21:37:44
>>i13e+(OP)
The gaming of SEO has been quietly destroying the utility of search writ large as a mechanism for quite a while.

Over the last year, its become palpable.

Google has such utility in this regard that in some cases, a hallucinating lie-machine offers better answer than an index of what information is available on the internet.

This issue with with Googles failure to respond to the deluge of SEO driven content in their searches. They can do better. They've chosen to not do so.

◧◩
2. massys+7d[view] [source] 2023-02-08 21:51:04
>>Rosana+K9
I see this sort of comment a lot, and I honestly don't know what it's talking about. What are people expecting out of Google that it's not delivering?

It can only index stuff that's on the Web. Stuff on the Web is, contrary to what is popularly asserted, only a tiny fraction of all human knowledge.

I think people are forgetting how bad search was before Google. Google drove Web directories to extinction. Remember Yahoo!? Back in that era, if I were looking for something as simple as the University of Michigan, I clicked and drilled down through a Yahoo directory. The obvious search query would have been useless. Google changed all that.

I view Google as the yellow pages. It works well for that. Is it an oracle of knowledge? Of course not. How could I possibly expect to find knowledge on a place where there is no reward for making it available? People producing knowledge don't work for free.

I've tried ChatGPT and it's no better. It serves up stuff that is flat-out wrong.

◧◩◪
3. basch+Rf[view] [source] 2023-02-08 22:01:04
>>massys+7d
The point of google was to RANK content on the web, and surface the BEST content to the top. In that regard it has failed, and the expectation is for them to correct the problem and return to delivering good content first.

It's not that the content doesn't exist or isn't indexed, its that its been drowned out by noise. Sifting through noise better was the entire reason google took off from more standard crawlers. It now returns results worse than crawlers from the previous era.

◧◩◪◨
4. emoden+Og[view] [source] 2023-02-08 22:05:37
>>basch+Rf
> It now returns results worse than crawlers from the previous era.

That is an absurd exaggeration.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. squiff+Uj[view] [source] 2023-02-08 22:16:44
>>emoden+Og
Not really everyone's familiar with the example of cooking recipes being breakfast with the author's life story in order to improve their position in Google rankings, but it's far more prevalent than just recipes. Today I tried to look up something about a feature in a particular piece of reasonably popular desktop software. The top hit that wasn't an advert was several years out of date. The second hit was clearly artificially inflated to long form journalism to try and get me to read a thousand words where 10 would do. Duck duck go linked me to some actual recent results, just like I would have expected with the crawlers of the previous era
[go to top]