You noticed how google search became unusably shit a few years ago

[alpha1beta@libretweet.com]

@ocean is there a source on this?

[heptasean@social.tchncs.de]

@Paradox By the way: Never heard of “Harold and the Purple Crayon” before, but https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Harold+and+the+Purple+Crayon%22+PDF results in a PDF with a Hindi translation (including the English original, but black and white without purple) and a PDF with a version with additional graphic explanations for people with disabilities on the first search result page. … which probably is as good as it gets for a work still under copyright.

[heptasean@social.tchncs.de]

@lispi314 You are not only talking about the snippet from *Google's* LLM at the top of the search results, but also about the other results? Haven't had *that* many obviously LLM-generated, but perhaps my interests are just niche enough. @Paradox

[paradox@raru.re]

@HeptaSean
It's an old kid's book about a boy that explores the world while drawing it all with his crayon.

Thanks. ^_^

[dorothywillson@mastodon.social]

@ocean right

[cassolotl@toot.wales]

@ocean Source: https://journalrecord.com/2025/02/20/is-google-making-search-worse-to-sell-more-ads/

[mdione@en.osm.town]

@ocean where is this coming from? What's the source?

[anne_delong@musician.social]

@Mikal @ocean

Well, as with other companies, competition and product reviews are needed to link good service to profits. So maybe consumers should change up their search engines.

Here's an article from PC Magazine that compares them:

Just a moment...

(www.pcmag.com)

#searchengines

[cosmocatalano@mastodon.social]

@ocean this big issue here is that everyone else's search is still worse

[jesterchen@social.tchncs.de]

@ocean Nein!

Doch.

Oh...

[amazing_helenab@mastodon.social]

@ocean

[khleedril@cyberplace.social]

@itamarst @ocean That was back when Google pledged, and did, no evil. Since then they've told us they are going to be evil.

[peteriskrisjanis@toot.lv]

@ocean this is why they have heavily invested in trump 2.0. It just makes cynical business sense.

[m0xee@nosh0b10.m0xee.net]

@ocean@raru.re
I wonder if they utilised the same strategy for Google Translate? Because it's equally unusable now — I recall early machine-assisted translation systems from the nineties doing much better job that what Google Translate does now. At times it's hard to figure out what is the meaning of the resulting text even if you speak both languages and know what the usual pitfalls are.

[punishmenthurts@autistics.life]

@ocean
.
what about when we don't need, "competition," for a pile of crap and just stop using it since it doesn't work?
.
Is "market share," a joke here? Everybody turns their computers off, because they're fucking useless but they're still winning, "market share?"

[kuba@toot.kuba-orlik.name]

@ocean f*cking google. Do you have the url to where that quote is from?

[nom@mk.spook.social]

@ocean@raru.re Can you believe "Buick" was once an innovative company. Then GM bought them. Oh well.

Not that I care much about network software, coz nearly all of it pretty much sucks. But anywayz think of all the companies Google has ruined. If there was a great idea in there- it'd likely get lost.

[elsactivitypub@goto.freakstic.fr]

@ocean so Google search results are bad intentionally

ok, annoying but why not

but then how is DDG even worse

[jackracc@furry.engineer]

@ocean Wendell of Level1Techs spoke about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vMKm44ypFY

[jcolag@mastodon.social]

@ocean Even better, if you go back to the PageRank paper, they call it out in the appendix, pointing out that advertising definitionally means that you want to provide worse search results to get people to look at the result page again.