this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
602 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

60056 readers
4010 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I guess we all kinda knew that, but it's always nice to have a study backing your opinions.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] solarvector@lemmy.zip 161 points 11 months ago (3 children)

What fight? Google is making money, and nearly everyone is playing Google's game following their tune. Google is definitely not losing.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 118 points 11 months ago (4 children)

A lot of people dont remember pre-google these days.

Normal search engines worked, but Google was better results.

Now that every website is gaming SEO and the top half of search results is ads that pay to be first...

Google isn't that much better. I went to DuckDuckGo recently. The only thing Google does better is local results. But that's because Google always knows where I am and where I've been.

There's no longer a reason to use Google as a search engine, except habit.

Pretty much same with chrome

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 11 months ago

The main thing that got me switching to Google back then wasn't the better results, but their promise not to collect or use our data.

That all changed after 9/11, but by then Google had grown so huge it was hard to avoid them.

Even so, I still went back to Webcrawler and the others quite a lot and never really consistently used one search engine faithfully.

[–] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

DDG uses Bing as the search API, and I don't see any evidence that it doesn't use SEO as well.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 35 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Just to be clear; “SEO” or “Search Engine Optimization” is a technique marketers use to craft web pages in a way that tricks search engine crawlers into considering them more relevant. It is not something search engines themselves do, and in many cases they actively fight against it.

So, it’s not whether or not DuckDuckGo uses SEO, it’s whether or not they’re susceptible to it.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

To add to that, Google is the big one.

So everyone tries to get around googles SEO prevention measures.the little guys just have to do literally anything different

[–] bellsDoSing@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Coincidentally, I happen to have been reading into SEO more in depth this week. Specifically official SEO docs by google:

https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/seo-starter-guide

To be clear, SEO isn't about tricking search engines per se. First and foremost it's about optimizing a given website so that the crawling and indexing of the website's content is working well.

It's just that various websites have tried various "tricks" over time to mislead the crawling, indexing and ultimately the search engine ranking, just so their website comes up higher and more often than it should based on its content's quality and relevancy.

Tricks like:

  • keyword stuffing
  • hidden content just visible to crawlers
  • ...

Those docs linked above (that link is just part of much more docs) even mention many of those "tricks" and explicitely advise against them, as it will cause websites to be penalized in their ranking.

Well, at least that's what the docs say. In the end it's an "arms race" between search engines and trickery using websites.

[–] Wiz@midwest.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I remember pre-Google. There were a few human curated sites back then (like DMoz and Yahoo). I'm thinking that might be a way to combat spam and AI sites. As a side bonus, maybe it will help de-Google the planet.

I'm looking for a Wikipedia-but-for-the-web, where human curators find real web content for me. I found Curlie.org, and tried to sign up for it, but never got a response back on my sign-ups. Still I'm hopeful for something like that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kratoz29@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There's no longer a reason to use Google as a search engine, except habit.

I need to rollback to Google from DDG because the latter seems to refuse to understand that I want to find specific words with ""

And DDG isn't perfect either, I need to add Reddit as well more than I'd like to.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Google ignores "" too these days.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] huginn@feddit.it 70 points 11 months ago

The Google ads team is functionally all of the company's revenue.

Google search still remains their most used product offering with most of their ad revenue (58.1% in 2022).

Google leadership is terrified that anyone could eat their lunch, because they know the search offering is getting worse and worse.

The origin of Google was taking out complacent search companies that had gotten comfy.

I'm pretty sure when I was laid off (1 year ago yesterday ❤️❤️ thanks Google) it was because they saw LLMs as a threat they hadn't taken seriously enough... Combined with that asshole billionaire being pissy that Google was only making 1.2 million per employee instead of 1.3 million.

[–] T4UTV1S@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago (1 children)

With the end result of enshittification, people will migrate if their experience is bad enough. Google wants to strike a balance between making as much money as humanly possible and making the search experience at least decent enough to retain the majority of their users.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I would venture a guess that most people aren’t even realizing that their results are crap. I can’t even see them realizing it until after, I don’t know, all of the products they found via Google search and purchased wound up being gimmicky crap like MyPillow? Even then, I would be really surprised if they figured out what was going on.

[–] T4UTV1S@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

True, if you look at YouTube, it's been getting worse and worse over time and yet people still go there, but that's also due to there being not that many good alternatives that have a bunch of content. Google has a ton of other good alternatives to compete with, so they're betting on the laziness factor and probably that people don't know better.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 64 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I switched to DDG merely to get rid of Google's irrelevant paid results up top.

If I'm searching for brand model manual I don't need every competitor's marketing detritus.

Likewise contact details etc... it's maddening.

[–] Pxtl@lemmy.ca 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but DDG seems to have worse organic results in my experience. I mean the bar is low, but DDG falls under it.

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 10 points 11 months ago

Oh yeah, the results are worse, but at least I can filter with search grammar and not also have to mentally filter out the ads too.

I'm not sure if we've ended up back at the ol' altavista/askjeeves keyword-stuffed hell yet, but it's close.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 51 points 11 months ago (7 children)

IMHO, the problem with Google isn't SEO. It's Google. When Google was great, it would find exactly what you were searching for. The whole point was to get you off of Google and on to whatever site you were looking for as quickly as possible. Over the last several years, their search has increasingly been drinking the 'engagement algorithm' Kool-Aid. Now Google doesn't search for what you ask, it searches for what it thinks you are trying to find. Which is fucking useless because I know exactly what I'm trying to find and that's exactly what I typed in. Selecting verbatim search and putting things in quotes helps. But it's still displays tons of irrelevant stuff that doesn't include what I searched for.

It's actually easy to point to exactly when the downfall started. Years ago Google was trying to make a social network called Google+ that would compete with Facebook. Before this, a + operator in the search field meant only show results that contain that particular term. But they wanted people to search for Google+, so they changed it so the plus sign became a searchable term and quotes were necessary to include a term or phrase. That was the moment Google decided that search wasn't their most important product. And it's been slow downhill ever since.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] scytale@lemm.ee 40 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There are literal careers dedicated to gaming search results. That’s bound to happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

My problem is replacing search terms with synonyms (which are often wrong for the context) and ignoring things like quotation marks or other search tools. It’s hard to exclude irrelevant results. Sometimes I’ll know an article’s exact title, search with and without quotes, and never find it.

[–] blahsay@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago (3 children)

It's time for Google to die. They are a truly awful company now so it's time to take her down to the shed like ol' blockbuster

[–] HKayn@dormi.zone 9 points 11 months ago (14 children)

What will be replacing it? Bing?

[–] kzhe@lemmy.zip 7 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Kagi (although recent drama leaves me soured)

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't fathom paying to have your search history catalogued in correlation to your payment info. This will end as it always does, either hacked or enshittified.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Static_Rocket@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I need a better programming specific search engine. DuckDuckGo seems like it's gotten worse at code/project searches and will now just assume you misspelled some common word.

[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

I tried Kagi last fall because everyone was raving about it.

Now I’m paying $5/month for search and couldn’t be happier 😅

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (13 children)

What is Kati and is it actually good?

Edit:

Is it kagi?

https://kagi.com/

Seems like something I'd be into but I'm also not a fan of my search results being logged against me.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (11 children)

Do you find the limited number of searches enough? I’d do it if it were unlimited for $5, but not going to pay $10 for a search engine.

[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I do 20-30 searches a day at work, so I definitely need to upgrade (annually it's around 100$ so not bad at all).

Their Universal Summarizer is awesome too

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cmrn@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Google’s relevance of search has gone extremely downhill in the last few years even before the surge of AI articles, so it’s no surprise the keyword-injected articles are all that’s winning now.

But holy shit does it piss me off how many of these first page results have literally incorrect information now too. Want to learn how to do something in software? See a release date? Find accurate information? Good fucking luck.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

For all people complain about the decline in ad revenue, there's still clearly a strong incentive to get click-bait responses.

I honestly wonder if the solution isn't to fight the SEO wars forever, but to just cut this shit off at the root and screen out sites that host ads, period. Obviously, Google can't limit its search by screening out folks that use AdSense because... that's half their business model. But perhaps a search engine that does bias itself against sites that monetize click-throughs could dramatically improve results.

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 27 points 11 months ago

Yeah it's pretty wild how bad search results have been lately. The unfettered proliferation of AI bullshit on the internet is gonna have some really goddamn irritating impacts on just about everything I think.

[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago (5 children)

I’ve been trying DuckDuckGo recently and already started seeing some better results. I’m not ready to change my default search engine yet, but if it keeps up I could see that happening sooner than later.

[–] ayaya@lemdro.id 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I recommend reading the actual paper this article is about. DDG is actually by far the worst by their measures. Google is 9% spam compared to 31% for DDG and 23% for Bing. That's a huge difference.

I would recommend trying a SearXNG instance if you haven't before. You can combine results from multiple sources. I use Google as my main source while also having access to the DDG-style !bangs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Been using DDG as my default for about 4 years now. It’s actually just gotten better as Google has gotten worse. I used to use the bangs a lot to check Google from DDG, but do that less and less.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I remember back in the day when the same shit was happening because websites would just put, like, an entire dictionary in tiny, hidden text somewhere at the bottom of the main page so it would have a greater chance of showing up no matter what you typed into the search engine.

It's pretty wild that they didn't think about people doing exactly the same thing with all the new methods they came up with to make searches "relevant" since that was one thing that made Google so much better than the competition back then.

Any system you make to push certain things over other things are going to be figured out and gamed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RandomVideos@programming.dev 17 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Arent they trying to make their search worse so you have to search multiple times, showing you more ads?

[–] axo@feddit.de 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The study found that ddg was worse than google though. But they only searched for products, so nk complete "test".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 5 points 11 months ago

I would think they'd make more money by sending you to sites that use Google ads.

The ads on Google's own pages are often fairly benign as far as internet ads go. I've certainly never had them tell me I'm the millionth visitor and try to reward me with the gift of an epileptic fit.

[–] Jaybob32@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago

I'm really enjoying perplexity.ai most of the time you just get the answer you're looking for.

[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

First I tried duckduckgo, now I’m checking out kagi.

[–] xenu@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Google search has,become so bad I couldn't even get the number of my insurance company yesterday. There was nothing but spam on the first page. I am in the market for something new.

[–] _danny@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm curious what query you used.

[–] Plopp@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I need the best telephone number for my insurance company

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

It looks like you need a phone! Here are our top advertisers of mobile phone cases!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›