Google has plunged the internet into a “spiral of decline”, the co-founder of the company’s artificial intelligence (AI) lab has claimed.

Mustafa Suleyman, the British entrepreneur who co-founded DeepMind, said: “The business model that Google had broke the internet.”

He said search results had become plagued with “clickbait” to keep people “addicted and absorbed on the page as long as possible”.

Information online is “buried at the bottom of a lot of verbiage and guff”, Mr Suleyman argued, so websites can “sell more adverts”, fuelled by Google’s technology.

  • @Chunk
    link
    English
    161 year ago

    You have to pay for kagi so they are not incentivized to serve ads. They are incentivized to give you a good set of search results so you keep paying.

    • Natanael
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      Lots of services are both paid and still show ads. Like cable TV

    • ඞmir
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      They’re not market-leading, but if they would be why wouldn’t they enshittify?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just curious, in the hypothetical situation that 100% of users on the web used Kagi how is it any different? They’ll demand more growth at that point but how would they achieve it? I don’t see how paying for the service avoids the issue of the product becoming worse as a result of peak market penetration and needing new methods of growth

      • @Chunk
        link
        English
        51 year ago

        Well, if your argument is: “any company that becomes a monopoly will abuse monopoly power”, then sure I agree with you. You got me there!

        My argument is: “given a reliable financial alternative to advertising, a company will be able to resist enshitification for a long time, as long as there is no absolute tyrannical monopoly.”

        I assumed the last part was implied and I’m sorry for the confusion!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          Makes sense, but yea it didn’t really answer the overall question of “if it hits peak market penetration how will it avoid going the Google route” since google also started with the same premise. I suppose the answer is hope it doesn’t become a monopoly

          • @SamBBMe
            link
            English
            61 year ago

            It’s also privately owned by one guy, so it doesn’t have to submit to investor pressure.

            Steam, for example, is basically a monopoly for PC game sales, but hasn’t enshittified because it is privately owned.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              While I agree that this does avoid enshitification, it’s always possible for a privately owned company to IPO. That’s why all of us are even here to begin with

              • Jojo
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                It’s also certainly possible for a privately owned company (even one owned by a single individual) to undergo enshitification, it is only (if anything) less likely.

              • @SamBBMe
                link
                English
                11 year ago

                It’s probably as good as we are going to get.

                The best options would be an open source, donation supported search engine, but the money required to host/develop that is immense.

                We are all freeloading off of Lemmy right now, unless you are donating to the people who are running the servers. The cost to run a search engine is much higher though – kagi pays (iirc) double digit cents for each search, even before development costs, with the average user doing 700 searches a month. The costs are way higher.

    • @WoahWoah
      link
      English
      41 year ago

      Exactly. The simple fact is, people need to get more willing to pay for things with money instead of personal data. Nothing is free, but we like the idea that things don’t cost money, and instead we’ve allowed corporations to literally buy and monetize our very selves.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Problem is, a lot of people don’t have a lot of money because of how the world has been allowed to go. Everything is funnelled towards the worst people who go unpunished somehow. There needs to be an uprising or something.