• kingthrillgore
    link
    fedilink
    English
    987 months ago

    I spent most of today looking at places to rent in Denver and I come home to Google having killed it’s fucking search engine. What the hell is going on

    • @jennwiththesea
      link
      English
      517 months ago

      That’s what you get for trying to have a real life.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      177 months ago

      Google decided that the entirety of reddit is perfect for training data in their AI LLM. People’s shitposts from 10 years ago have now been given the spotlight at the top of google searches.

  • @RGB3x3
    link
    English
    76
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Google has been bad for a long time, but they’ve shut the bed so hard lately. Seriously, look at this:

    I actually run out of screenshot space before I can get to an actual regular search result!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      147 months ago

      Search done from Germany.

      The mobile search doesnt look much different. The order on mobile is as follows:

      Both are Firefox Desktop (Win) and Mobile (Android) running Consent-O-Matic and ublock Origin

        • @vimdiesel
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          are you using a VPN? turned off location settings?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              27 months ago

              Well, Flint, Michigan had a high profile water issue, so it might be guessing location based on the question.

      • @Linnce
        link
        English
        17 months ago

        It shows the exact same results in Brazil

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Bing has a similar problem where it just repeats the results, some pages are only 1 result so you just keep clicking next

  • tedu
    link
    fedilink
    617 months ago

    So weird, that’s not what I see.

    • @voracitude
      link
      English
      1877 months ago

      On the one hand, generative AI doesn’t have to give deterministic answers i.e. it won’t necessarily generate the same answer even when asked the same question in the same way.

      But on the other hand, editing the HTML of any page to say whatever you want and then taking a screenshot of it is very easy.

      • Otter
        link
        fedilink
        English
        417 months ago

        It could also be A/B testing, so not everyone will have the AI running in general

        • @credo
          link
          English
          -217 months ago

          It’s not A/B testing if they aren’t getting feedback.

          • Otter
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Wouldn’t they be? They could measure how likely it is that someone clicks on the generated link/text

            • @credo
              link
              English
              -17
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                317 months ago

                What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads.

                This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                27 months ago

                Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate.

                Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google’s for the former is what got us into this hell hole.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  17 months ago

                  Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you’re seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more.

          • @halcyoncmdr
            link
            English
            247 months ago

            Google runs passive A/B testing all the time.

            If you’re using a Google service there’s a 99% chance you’re part of some sort of internal test of changes.

      • @QuadratureSurfer
        link
        English
        217 months ago

        Technically, generative AI will always give the same answer when given the same input. But, what happens is a “seed” is mixed in to help randomize things, that way it can give different answers every time even if you ask it the same question.

        • @jyte
          link
          English
          87 months ago

          What happened to my computers being reliable, predictable, idempotent ? :'(

          • @QuadratureSurfer
            link
            English
            47 months ago

            They still are. Giving a generative AI the same input and the same seed results in the same output every time.

            • @jyte
              link
              English
              17 months ago

              Technically they still are, but since you don’t have a hand on the seed, practically they are not.

              • @QuadratureSurfer
                link
                English
                17 months ago

                OK, but we’re discussing whether computers are “reliable, predictable, idempotent”. Statements like this about computers are generally made when discussing the internal workings of a computer among developers or at even lower levels among computer engineers and such.

                This isn’t something you would say at a higher level for end-users because there are any number of reasons why an application can spit out different outputs even when seemingly given the “same input”.

                And while I could point out that Llama.cpp is open source (so you could just go in and test this by forcing the same seed every time…) it doesn’t matter because your statement effectively boils down to something like this:

                “I clicked the button (input) for the random number generator and got a different number (output) every time, thus computers are not reliable or predictable!”

                If you wanted to make a better argument about computers not always being reliable/predictable, you’re better off pointing at how radiation can flip bits in our electronics (which is one reason why we have implemented checksums and other tools to verify that information hasn’t been altered over time or in transition). Take, for instance, the example of what happened to some voting machines in Belgium in 2003: https://www.businessinsider.com/cosmic-rays-harm-computers-smartphones-2019-7

                Anyway, thanks if you read this far, I enjoy discussing things like this.

                • @jyte
                  link
                  English
                  17 months ago

                  You are taking all my words way too strictly as to what I intended :)

                  It was more along the line : Me, a computer user, up until now, I could (more or less) expect the tool (software/website) I use in a relative consistant maner (be it reproducing a crash following some actions). Doing the same thing twice would (mostly) get me the same result/behaviour. For instance, an Excel feature applied on a given data should behave the same next time I show it to a friend. Or I found a result on Google by typing a given query, I hopefully will find that website again easily enough with that same query (even though it might have ranked up or down a little).

                  It’s not strictly “reliable, predictable, idempotent”, but consistent enough that people (users) will say it is.

                  But with those tools (ie: chatGPT), you get an answer, but are unable to get back that initial answer with the same initial query, and it basically makes it impossible to get that same* output because you have no hand on the seed.

                  The random generator is a bit streached, you expect it to be different, it’s by design. As a user, you expect the LLM to give you the correct answer, but it’s actually never the same* answer.

                  *and here I mean same as “it might be worded differently, but the meaning is close to similar as previous answer”. Just like if you ask a question twice to someone, he won’t use the exact same wording, but will essentially says the same thing. Which is something those tools (or rather “end users services”) do not give me. Which is what I wanted to point out in much fewer words :)

      • Aatube
        link
        fedilink
        157 months ago

        That seems like a Wikipedia capture for the wrong page instead of AI.

      • Digitalprimate
        link
        English
        47 months ago

        I too am skeptical, but there have been so many of these the last few days… is it just a new meme?

        • lucas
          link
          fedilink
          107 months ago

          @RecursiveParadox @voracitude it absolutely has become a meme, there are (or were) a bunch of repeatable results.

          Google is probably whack-a-mole’ing them now, because “google’s AI search results are trying to kill people” has entered the collective consciousness.

          • @vimdiesel
            link
            English
            37 months ago

            I have no doubt some of their AI answers have antivax and injecting bleach recommendations from all over the web as part of their training regime.

        • MrScottyTay
          link
          fedilink
          English
          47 months ago

          I saw this a few days ago too when I went to see the film and wanted to check who some people were in the film.

      • KokeshOP
        link
        English
        37 months ago

        When you do this query, won’t you get the same?

        • @thegreatgarbo
          link
          English
          27 months ago

          If you read the arstechnica article Google is correcting these errors on the fly so the search results can change rapidly.

    • @Nobody
      link
      English
      13
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Works on my machine.

      • @AdamEatsAss
        link
        English
        187 months ago

        Oh perfect. We’ll just point production to your machine.

    • @Hobbes_Dent
      link
      English
      27 months ago

      It’s, uh, not what I remember.

      - old

      • @markon
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I don’t get the doom but idk I have been watching this stuff closely for over a decade. I think it’s exciting and people are having All these strange expectations out of these systems all the sudden just because they’re smart. Well they were smart before any of this generative AI stuff. Also scientific breakthroughs in medicine, blind people have something that can assist them. As someone with some disabilities, and knowing a lot of people who also have disabilities, it seems to be the privilege of the healthy and comfortable to keep the status quo.

        Also if we want to play that game we were so fucked by climate change already that I had no hope. Now I have a little. It’s not going away so let’s push for open open open free software. (And model weights)

        • @vimdiesel
          link
          English
          37 months ago

          we aren’t talking about using it to -benefit- human society like discovering new proteins or vaccines. We’re talking about it fucking up search results on google and generating billions of new sites with fucking spam. It’s a tool, but it’s being completely misused and ruining the internet.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    397 months ago

    Well, we know Google won’t get rid of this.

    They’ll only cancel it after it actually works and becomes useful

  • @fne8w2ah
    link
    English
    387 months ago

    Did somebody say enshittification?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    387 months ago

    We really need a whole community just for the very funny AI errors like this. I could spend all day reading about leaving a dog in a hot car, jumping off a bridge and eating at least one rock a day.

        • @Chip_Rat
          link
          English
          77 months ago

          Great content isn’t necessarily everyone’s prefered content. Having it all in one place helps people who want to see it see it and people who don’t don’t have to. Win win.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            27 months ago

            We have not even come close to over saturation yet. Now once we have AI making mistakes about AI past mistakes being used for a meme about AI mistakes then you will be on the money.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    357 months ago

    I asked Google for the release date of the new Final Fantasy XIV expansion today, which comes out June 28th. It told me March 26th

    • mynachmadarch
      link
      fedilink
      87 months ago

      I’m pretty sure March 26 is the day the pre-order started, so that one at least kind of makes sense.

      • andrew
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 months ago

        But not from a knowledge engine. It makes sense if some rando just spouted off a date from the top of their head but this is the former world leader in knowledge capture and search.

  • Lad
    link
    fedilink
    English
    347 months ago

    What the hell is going on with Google search? Has it completely shit itself after the AI implementation? I know its been bad for a while but this is another level.

    • lemmyvore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      277 months ago

      Short answer, yes. The ratio of LLM generated noise to actual content is increasing exponentially as we speak. To us it seems overnight because the increase is so steep but it’s been happening for several years. And it’s going to get a lot worse.

      Honestly, I think we’ll have to go back to 90s methods like web rings and human curated link directories.

      • masterofn001
        link
        fedilink
        English
        57 months ago

        I remember having to buy a book. A book with URLs. Before search engines existed.

        Good times.

        On Google: I’ll never forgive them for getting rid of their pseudo secret government search google.com/unclesam where I found a lot of .mil docs I probably shouldn’t have been able to.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I do random hobby tinkering and search results have become so useless that I’m having to read a lot more books. Everything takes longer this way.

  • Hal-5700X
    link
    fedilink
    English
    267 months ago

    Will, it’s not wrong. Welcome to the AI powered world of tomorrow.

      • Echo Dot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17 months ago

        That’s low end of average for a human. A particularly dim human admittedly, but we’ve all met them.

        • @psycho_driver
          link
          English
          37 months ago

          Never the less, these dim-witted humans can aspire to greatness. See Forrest Gump and Donald Trump.

          • Echo Dot
            link
            fedilink
            English
            47 months ago

            See the Republicans do sport the disadvantaged. They support the idiots, the greatest disability of them all.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    25
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I stopped using Google years ago. I started using Bing but had to stop that as it would divert me to MSN to sign in when clicking a link for a news article. Like a news article for The Independent or The Times or any other.

    I then started using DuckDuckGo which is powered by Bing, but found it wasn’t great at many searches.

    I now use Arc Search most of the time and click browse for me to get the information I want without the bullshit. Search is essentially dead due to greed.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        57 months ago

        I used Qwant for a few days and then it popped up a modal dialog asking me to turn off my ad-blocker. Never used it again after that.

        • @Buffalox
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          Funny I’ve never seen that, but I switch around from time to time. Because none are perfect unfortunately.

          • @vimdiesel
            link
            English
            17 months ago

            kagi is the best but it will cost you $10 a month. It’s been worth it to me, but probably not to everyone.

            • @Buffalox
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Interesting concept, but it’s a bit expensive IMO, considering the huge amount of “free” options.

              The pricing is only in USD without taxes. Listing the price excluding tax is illegal here (Denmark and I think the rest of EU), so apparently not a service meant for use outside USA.
              Ad free is not a problem for me, i use Firefox with µBlock Origin.

        • @Buffalox
          link
          English
          3
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Startpage uses outside search results, but should be very secure like DuckDuckGo, and better certified.
          Qwant is AFAIK more independent, and I like the layout better.

          Both give pretty good search results IMO, but are somewhat lacking in map/geographic searches. For instance searching “Angola” could result in a restaurant in London. Just as a hypothetical example.
          So I do use Google maps too.

        • @vimdiesel
          link
          English
          27 months ago

          qwant = 95% bing results, startpage = 98% google results. They are slimmer. They don’t keep your search history or ip address. better for privacy but not much better for search results.

      • @vimdiesel
        link
        English
        27 months ago

        qwant uses bing and is mostly a proxy for it. Startpage is a proxy for google. the only thing they really do is protect your privacy, they don’t give you better search results.

        • @Buffalox
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          That’s a bit disappointing, I thought Qwant had their own search. I know startpage used Google originally, but I wasn’t sure if they still did.

          • @vimdiesel
            link
            English
            17 months ago

            it shouldn’t have been because they return google search results and not bing

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            Nope I tried it precisely when DDG was out and it was working… Images were not so those may have come from Bing… But regular searches were working

    • @psycho_driver
      link
      English
      117 months ago

      I’m finding SearXNG to be very good. It operates like dogpile used to but is actually functional and it pretty much entirely squelches product placement results. I actually have to manually go to google if I want to get product listings for something.

    • @alyth
      link
      English
      37 months ago

      this is the first i hear of Arc, is it available as an iOS app only?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Seems to only have an iOS app right now. There is a desktop version for Windows and MacOS Here.

        It is annoying that it wants to send you the download link by email though.

        Edit: Here is an example of how the results look when asking for opening times of a book store in my city.

        • @alyth
          link
          English
          27 months ago

          That looks clean, thanks for posting the screenshot!

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Anytime. This is what search should be. You shouldn’t have to click into links for such simple information.

  • @vimdiesel
    link
    English
    14
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    how do you guys get these things? I never see any summaries like that. I wonder if one of my adblockers is killing google AI lmao. Do you have to be logged into your google account? I never log into google any more.

    • @suction
      link
      English
      27 months ago

      It’s probably fake

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        27 months ago

        I just Googled “Fall Guy” and the AI response doesn’t match the OP. I was shown a summary of the movie.

        • @SlopppyEngineer
          link
          English
          67 months ago

          You have to type “Fall Guy series” to get the result. The result from “Fall Guy” is about the movie and that’s a normal response.

        • @suction
          link
          English
          -57 months ago

          Yeah Reddit, Lemmy, 4chan and all these meme platforms aren’t exactly trustworthy, because to get the upvotes you have to cater to the “omg that’s hilarious” dummies who are looking for quick fixes for their uneducated hunger for hedonist distractions

  • @mojo_raisin
    link
    English
    147 months ago

    It’s time to return to human curated directories.

    • Jamyang
      link
      English
      17 months ago

      Do you know if there are any active ones? Hopefully categorized according to genre, geography, language etc?

      • @mojo_raisin
        link
        English
        17 months ago

        Nope, been thinking about what it would take to make one though.

  • NutWrench
    link
    English
    137 months ago

    Behold the wonders of AI! Now, we don’t have to pay human beings to edit webpages for us! Thanks to AI, you can just sit back and watch the money roll in!