autotldr@lemmings.world
on 26 May 2024 17:25
nextcollapse
đ¤ Iâm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Over the last two years, a series of updates to Google Search amount to a dramatic upheaval to the Internetâs most powerful tool, complete with an unprecedented AI feature.
Last week, Google CEO Sundar Pichai stood in front of a crowd at the companyâs annual developer conference and announced one of the most significant moves in the search engineâs history.
Going forward, Pichai said, Google Search would provide its own AI-generated answers to many of your questions, a feature called âAI Overviewsâ thatâs already rolled out to users in the United States.
âOur recent updates aim to connect people with content that is helpful, satisfying and original, from a diverse range of sites across the web,â a Google spokesperson tells the BBC.
Over the past few years, swaths of savvy internet users started adding the word âRedditâ to the end of their web searches in the hopes it would bring up people sharing their honest opinions, as opposed to websites trying to game Googleâs system.
Katie Berry, owner of the cleaning advice website Housewife How-Tos, assumes users will just end their searches if Googleâs AI answers questions for them.
â
Saved 92% of original text.
darvit@lemmy.darvit.nl
on 26 May 2024 22:40
nextcollapse
I just love all the google seach AI memes that have sprung out of this change. Theyâre all unhinged, but the fun thing is that you canât tell which one is real.
Iâve seen suggestions that many are just faked with the browser and your ability to edit the page as shown to you because if you search what was searched in the image you get a different result; but itâs generating the responses real time when you search so even if you yourself search the same phrase multiple times, you get different results.
Which is bad enough on its own. The same queries should not give different results each time.
I have seen one that was definitely genuine. It had taken information from websites related to an art and writing group Iâm a member of, essentially treating several works of fiction (mostly from the 20+ year old content that was written when we were teenagers) as containing factual information about real animals. The person who posted the meme was not a member of the group, but was just pointing out how stupid it was that such obvious fiction was presented as fact. We found it amusing because the AI was pointing to several of the groupâs sites as places to get more information about these real animals. There is definitely no legit information on those sites.
Remember, folks, the AIâs have gobbled up decades worth of teenagersâ fanfic and original stories. All the weird shit in those stories is getting regurgitated as though it were real.
darvit@lemmy.darvit.nl
on 26 May 2024 23:06
collapse
Yeah what could go wrong when training AI on any random internet data indiscriminately. Itâs all fun until the AI proposes home remedies for appendicitis.
AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org
on 27 May 2024 16:47
collapse
In my experience, it has not generated results in real time. Iâve either gotten the exact same response, or a prompt asking âwould you like to generate an AI response to your search?â
So it seems like, and would make sense, that in a given time period they only generate a response once per given search, and reuse that response in the future, since thatâs far more efficient
coffeetest@beehaw.org
on 27 May 2024 01:31
nextcollapse
So I tried it. And where did that image come from?
<img alt="" src="https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/77e44a7e-0487-4bd6-8af0-afef93c3ac5a.webp">
Flax_vert@feddit.uk
on 27 May 2024 07:52
nextcollapse
I think stuff like this would be more appropriate for voice control devices, namely Google Assistant
coffeetest@beehaw.org
on 28 May 2024 19:55
collapse
I didnât make my point clear. My question wasnât really where the image was sourced, it was more about the value of what Google is doing matching an essentially random image next to the text it scraped from a website. Why did it choose that image? Adding a random image like that seems like what a low-grade SEO would do to tick the needed boxes not a high-quality product from a multi-billion dollar company. The image in no way enhances the meaning of what I asked. In fact, it does the opposite. It is a bit of Google becoming what it mocked.
It picked an image from a website talking about AI, and slapped it next to a response talking about AI.
Theoretically, a website with a text related to the response, âshouldâ have an image related to the response⌠but yeah, it looks kind of like cheap box ticking, like the AI didnât check whether the photo content itself was relevant or not.
onlinepersona@programming.dev
on 27 May 2024 07:31
nextcollapse
This just shows that too many people are dependent on google, even though their search results are shit. The power of defaults and brand names.
Ads are fine in the form of search results that are clearly marked as sponsored. The issue with ads are when they are manipulative, intrusive, obnoxious or have sketchy data collecting
It is incredible looking back to 2005 and realizing that the world has 1.5 billion MORE people today and the number of internet users grew by ~5.5 billion. Doesnât really explain Googleâs changes - still remarkable how different the internet was that Google built its search platform around.
Itâs concerning to see how much power Google really holds over small websites
âI understand that Google doesnât owe us or anyone else traffic,â says Navarro, of HouseFresh. âBut Google controls the roads. If tomorrow they decide the roads wonât go to an entire town, that town dies. Itâs too much power to just shrug and say, âOh well, itâs just the free market,ââ she says.
As weâve seen so many times, they got their foot in the door by actually being the best, but now only really keep that position by paying to be the default on most devices. Given how Microsoft were forced to offer browser choices on Windows, is there hope that Google are forced to offer choices on Android and Chrome?
BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.com
on 27 May 2024 09:15
nextcollapse
Actually Google has been forced to offer choices on Android in the EU, but for existing devices the prompt only consists of a permanent notification that you can easily ignore: my partner has been ignoring it for the past month.
Just because there is a choice doesnât mean that the casual user is aware of it. You could always chose to install Firefox on Windows, but Microsoft still got done for pushing IE as the default.
Iâm not sure the choice between Bing or Google, two search engines controlled by giant corporations who make money from advertising, is enough of a choice for a truly free Internet. And as the Bing outage last week showed us, most other search engines are just Bing repackaged.
Search engines are not baked into Android, they get exposed through apps like everything else.
The choice is limited to every search engine out there⌠which are not many, but what can you do, it takes a lot of resources to spin up a search engine.
threaded - newest
đ¤ Iâm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Over the last two years, a series of updates to Google Search amount to a dramatic upheaval to the Internetâs most powerful tool, complete with an unprecedented AI feature. Last week, Google CEO Sundar Pichai stood in front of a crowd at the companyâs annual developer conference and announced one of the most significant moves in the search engineâs history. Going forward, Pichai said, Google Search would provide its own AI-generated answers to many of your questions, a feature called âAI Overviewsâ thatâs already rolled out to users in the United States. âOur recent updates aim to connect people with content that is helpful, satisfying and original, from a diverse range of sites across the web,â a Google spokesperson tells the BBC. Over the past few years, swaths of savvy internet users started adding the word âRedditâ to the end of their web searches in the hopes it would bring up people sharing their honest opinions, as opposed to websites trying to game Googleâs system. Katie Berry, owner of the cleaning advice website Housewife How-Tos, assumes users will just end their searches if Googleâs AI answers questions for them. â Saved 92% of original text.
I just love all the google seach AI memes that have sprung out of this change. Theyâre all unhinged, but the fun thing is that you canât tell which one is real.
Iâve seen suggestions that many are just faked with the browser and your ability to edit the page as shown to you because if you search what was searched in the image you get a different result; but itâs generating the responses real time when you search so even if you yourself search the same phrase multiple times, you get different results.
Which is bad enough on its own. The same queries should not give different results each time.
I have seen one that was definitely genuine. It had taken information from websites related to an art and writing group Iâm a member of, essentially treating several works of fiction (mostly from the 20+ year old content that was written when we were teenagers) as containing factual information about real animals. The person who posted the meme was not a member of the group, but was just pointing out how stupid it was that such obvious fiction was presented as fact. We found it amusing because the AI was pointing to several of the groupâs sites as places to get more information about these real animals. There is definitely no legit information on those sites.
Remember, folks, the AIâs have gobbled up decades worth of teenagersâ fanfic and original stories. All the weird shit in those stories is getting regurgitated as though it were real.
Yeah what could go wrong when training AI on any random internet data indiscriminately. Itâs all fun until the AI proposes home remedies for appendicitis.
In my experience, it has not generated results in real time. Iâve either gotten the exact same response, or a prompt asking âwould you like to generate an AI response to your search?â
So it seems like, and would make sense, that in a given time period they only generate a response once per given search, and reuse that response in the future, since thatâs far more efficient
So I tried it. And where did that image come from? <img alt="" src="https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/77e44a7e-0487-4bd6-8af0-afef93c3ac5a.webp">
I think stuff like this would be more appropriate for voice control devices, namely Google Assistant
Just ask Googleâs AIâŚ
<img alt="" src="https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/402a8e0b-0cbf-4c15-92b8-e0613e25ece3.webp">
I didnât make my point clear. My question wasnât really where the image was sourced, it was more about the value of what Google is doing matching an essentially random image next to the text it scraped from a website. Why did it choose that image? Adding a random image like that seems like what a low-grade SEO would do to tick the needed boxes not a high-quality product from a multi-billion dollar company. The image in no way enhances the meaning of what I asked. In fact, it does the opposite. It is a bit of Google becoming what it mocked.
It picked an image from a website talking about AI, and slapped it next to a response talking about AI.
Theoretically, a website with a text related to the response, âshouldâ have an image related to the response⌠but yeah, it looks kind of like cheap box ticking, like the AI didnât check whether the photo content itself was relevant or not.
This just shows that too many people are dependent on google, even though their search results are shit. The power of defaults and brand names.
Anti Commercial-AI license
Wasnât Googleâs original appeal the lack of clutter?
Yes
<img alt="" src="https://beehaw.org/pictrs/image/9a753bfa-4ba7-44d8-b392-b94270f714da.webp">
I meant, the âno adsâ thing was only feasible in the very beginning, when they were solely funded by venture capital.
Ads are fine in the form of search results that are clearly marked as sponsored. The issue with ads are when they are manipulative, intrusive, obnoxious or have sketchy data collecting
It is incredible looking back to 2005 and realizing that the world has 1.5 billion MORE people today and the number of internet users grew by ~5.5 billion. Doesnât really explain Googleâs changes - still remarkable how different the internet was that Google built its search platform around.
Itâs concerning to see how much power Google really holds over small websites
As weâve seen so many times, they got their foot in the door by actually being the best, but now only really keep that position by paying to be the default on most devices. Given how Microsoft were forced to offer browser choices on Windows, is there hope that Google are forced to offer choices on Android and Chrome?
Actually Google has been forced to offer choices on Android in the EU, but for existing devices the prompt only consists of a permanent notification that you can easily ignore: my partner has been ignoring it for the past month.
Google controls one set of roads, people choose which roads to use.
On Android, youâre free to install any browser and search engine you wish. For example, âBing for Androidâ is already a thing.
People choose not to choose. Theyâre not interested in engaging with the space or technology any deeper than the default.
Exploiting this fact to the point of defacto monopoly should still be considered wrong.
Just because there is a choice doesnât mean that the casual user is aware of it. You could always chose to install Firefox on Windows, but Microsoft still got done for pushing IE as the default.
MS got dinged because they claimed Windows couldnât work without MSIE, which was a lie⌠and they had a large market share.
Nowadays Apple forces everyone to use Safari on iOS, and nobody bats an eye.
Iâm not sure the choice between Bing or Google, two search engines controlled by giant corporations who make money from advertising, is enough of a choice for a truly free Internet. And as the Bing outage last week showed us, most other search engines are just Bing repackaged.
Search engines are not baked into Android, they get exposed through apps like everything else.
The choice is limited to every search engine out there⌠which are not many, but what can you do, it takes a lot of resources to spin up a search engine.
So their cynical move is to send more traffic to reddit at the same time redditâs quality has gone down the toilet. Sounds like Google alright.