this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
581 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
6873 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 91 points 8 months ago (4 children)

It's been said before: Google does not find you the best result for your query. Google finds you the result that makes them the most money from AdSense and has words from your query.

If Mozilla wasn't funded by Google, the best thing they could do is include a helpful/unhelpful ranking for websites, then filter Google results by that. Search should be social, not commercial.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Google's method of ranking results has clearly had a detrimental effect on website content and structure as well. I can't believe how much nonsense junk padding there is on all the top results. You can understand why people are happy to have an LLM sift through the junk and make up an answer, even if it's wrong half the time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Even a junk made-up answer would be an improvement over the results I recently got after trying both Google and DDG to search up a random question that came to me. I wanted to find a list of animals with vertical pupils, and all I got were pages with headlines like "Why do some animals have vertical pupils?" that didn't answer my question or even the question in the headline!

load more comments (2 replies)