zlacker

>>pabs3+(OP)
> Nobody really expects to be able to find anything of value in a Google search now

This is a categorically false premise. The kind of statement that only makes sense when you're in a deep bubble and entirely removed from the average person's use of the internet.

Deliberately removing yourself from Google is fine for the author who is more concerned about taking an ideological stance than they are about being discoverable, but removing yourself from Google is terribly bad advice for anyone who wants to help people find their content.

Many people do use Google to find content and people, even if you don't.

>>Aurorn+Nm
If everyone on HN stopped using Google and started using DuckDuckGo. And we told all our friends and family to do the same. Would it have an impact?

>>codetr+ev
Not even on HN people are united in preferring Google.

Personally I tried to switch many times and always made my way back, and I'm not even really in the Google ecosystem unlike others.

>>dewey+sw
Google Search was awesome until it was ruined by Ads. Such a shame. There's dorking, however Google is actively de-indexing content, so much so that it makes you wonder what (monetary) motivation Google is serving with Search because it's not "information for all" anymore. The term "sell out" comes to mind, which sucks when you think about how cool Google was (i.e., the best and brightest doing the most so you could also do the most).

>>scrum-+BK
>because it's not "information for all" anymore.

Anyone who has thought google was doing anything good after they bought doubleclick is living in fantasy land. They pretty much immediately started playing advertising extortion games and they optimize for more viewed google ads with things like AMP and making ads harder to notice. Google stopped caring about "information for all" the second after they made their original research paper and realized they had a significant competitive advantage to make some money with.