• kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 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

  • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 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!

    • ArcticAmphibian@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Nope. Google trained the model it’s using for search results off of Reddit, etc. junk data and expected it to be coherent.

      • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I wonder if they considered reddit votes to try to give more weight to high quality answers but also high quality jokes.

        But without votes pure nonsense becomes equal to truth.

        Humans could use reddit because we understand the site enough to be able to filter the valuable from the bad.

        I feel like the answer would be in between ai specifically to be such a filter.

        Every such post of google failing i have screen capped and then asked chatgpt for a more detailed explanation to do what google suggests i do. Everytime it managed to call out the issues. So just allowing an ai to proofread its response in context of the question could stop a lot of hallucinations.

        But its at least 3 times as slow and expensive if it needs to change its first response.

        But i guess doing things properly isnt profitable , better to just rush tech and kill your most famous product.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          People upvote stupid stuff as well though. Because humans understand humor, irony, and satire.

          The AI is like those people that need /s to be able to work it out. If it’s missing they erroneously take everything as serious.

  • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 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.

    • voracitude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 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.

        • lucas@fitt.au
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 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@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 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.

        • thegreatgarbo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

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

      • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 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@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

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

            • jyte@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

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

              • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 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.

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

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

          • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 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.

          • Otter@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

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

            • credo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 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.

              • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 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.

              • IllNess@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 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.

    • dutchkimble@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      But the real question is, is the colour blue that you see, the colour blue that I see?

    • ChocoLemming@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I get the same description, but when on desktop it’s in the ‘about’ section that appears on the right side of the results, so a different spot than in the OP’s image. Haven’t tried recreating any of the other flops yet though haha.

    • Sidyctism@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Thats because LLMs have a certain level of randomisation built in. You wont always get the same result for any given inquiry

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I literally don’t see any AI blurbs at all in my searches. I wonder if one of my 4 ad blockers is killing the javascript element.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I read somewhere they rolled it out to the US only and more countries are for now on the yet-to-do list aka soon™

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          No idea how fast they want to roll it out globally.
          But by the recent track record I’d wager they are doing it rather fast than slow.

      • Princeali311@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m in the US and opted into the beta for the AI stuff, but so far my experience has been generally positive.

  • fossilesque@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I like to use the Void from r/place as a metaphor for the Internet’s gremlins. Google has called to the void, didn’t bother to filter it and isn’t happy with what it found. To me that signals that Google no longer understands internet culture.

  • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    “Take a look at yourself cause that is what you need to do, 'cause the only problem in this room is about you, 'cause you’re a liar”

    -Silia Kapsis, 2024

  • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I stopped use it 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 know 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.

        • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 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.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 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 street in London. Just as a hypothetical example.
          So I do use Google maps too.

      • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 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.

      • drspod@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 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@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

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

          • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 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.

      • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 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.

    • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 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.

  • weew@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

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

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