What’s your opinion? Does google really “not work” anymore? Are there any better search engines? Why did the quality of search results go down? I honestly stumbled onto this question through this music video, what is ironic in it’s own way i feel…

  • bermuda@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Google is definitely iffy for me, which is why I’ve been bouncing between alternates. A lot of people like to complain about how google is filled with ads and spam results like Pinterest, but even then it just doesn’t really seem to give accurate results anymore, and even when results are accurate it’s very surface level. From what I found, it loves to push listicle articles and such when googling a new topic, as opposed to say, Wikipedia or an encyclopedia article. Like if I search about Barbie, I’ll probably get a bunch of ScreenRant-esque articles before I get the IMDB page. There have been dozens of instances of me searching for controls for video games and getting clickbait-y articles, some of which barely even make an attempt to answer the question, before getting an IGN or GameFaqs article that’s to-the-point and answers my fucking question.

    There are definitely better search engines out there, but they all have their own flaws. DuckDuckGo is pretty bare bones and can also give poor results if your search is too vague. You have to adapt to that one. Others like Brave have AI to help out with summaries and stuff, but Brave’s management is “problematic” and so some people might not want to support them.

    TL;DR: on google, not only is there ads and spam, but it’s just hard to find answers anymore. Everything is clickbait. And with other options, they are good but they also have their own major flaws that some might find unappealing.

    • any1th3r3 [he/him]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly, I’ve noticed this over the past few months, actual relevant results are being pushed much further down the stack.

      If you want to explore alternatives, I’ve been using SearXNG, a so-called “metasearch engine”, where you can get a combination of various search engine results, based on your preferences. It’s pretty good, when it works (it tends to get rate-limited fairly often… or at least some of its results / search engines do, which can get annoying).

      • Hangry @lm.helilot.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        Self-hoster of a searxNG here. With docker, your can spin your own in 1 minute top. I’ll never go back to any other search engine, this is the best (imho).

      • Kata1yst@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can also selfhost SearxNG with modest hardware and side step the rate limits. I love it. Happy to answer any questions

        • sylverstream@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          How does it compare to Kagi?

          I can’t self host it, what’s the problem with using an existing instance?

          • Kata1yst@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I haven’t used Kagi much, but my understanding is that Kagi has their own indexing and you can customize your search by ranking your results.

            SearxNG runs searches against many other search engines and then uses an algorithm to rank the results sanely. So less customizable but also the net you’re casting is much wider.

            You could easily self host on a free-tier instance in Oracle cloud or AWS for a year, or even just run it on a laptop. But if you really can’t see a way to do that you can of course use one of the listed instances, you’ll just be more likely to bump up against rate limits since you’re sharing limits with many other people.

      • Phoenix [she/they]@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just to help me understand: Why is it that when I try the same search on different instances of this, I get very different search results?

        • any1th3r3 [he/him]@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This would depend on the search engines enabled and/or the default language/country set (if any) for that particular instance, you can find those in the settings of the instance itself (and enable/disable whichever you’re most interested in, as well as a few other relevant settings).

    • Hangry @lm.helilot.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Brave’s marketing has always made me uneasy, but it was more like a vague thought. This why I’m intrigued by your opinion. Do you have examples of their “problematic” management?

      • bermuda@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s of course biased, maybe for some people it wouldn’t be problematic, but the CEO of brave has historically donated to organizations and California state bills that opposed same-sex marriage. This was around 15 years ago (2008 and 2009) so maybe he’s changed. But for some people, that might be a dealbreaker. He resigned from Mozilla in 2014 because it came to light that he had made these donations. He apologized in 2014, but for some people that might not be enough.

        (note: I’m not trying to be biased with this. For some people reading this, his apology might be perfectly fine for you. But, for others this might be enough to be labeled “problematic.”)

            • notfromhere@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The affiliate links are done by (almost?) every search engine so it’s not fair to single out Brave for it. Note I’m not defending them, if you’re truly up in arms about it talk about all of them doing it.

              • Molehill8244@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Do you have a source for that? I say this because it made the news everywhere when it was exposed. Just to be clear… it wasn’t that affiliate links made the index. The Brave browser would hijack what you typed in the URL bar, even if it was the exact URL, with their own affiliate link

                • notfromhere@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Looks like I need to start saving things as I stumble upon them because searching for them later is fruitless. I’ll delete my comment as I can’t dig up a source.

            • papaya@possumpat.io
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yeah, the crypto stuff is getting too much, plus they’re shoving stuff like their VPN, search, and news down users’ throat. I used to use Brave as a secondary browser bc of its profile feature, but switched to Orion a couple weeks ago and never looked back.

      • millie@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I honestly have never used Brave largely because its logo makes me feel like the developer is way too into WoW. Weird reason to judge a software probably, but sometimes it’s best to trust your gut.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have notice that in the past you altered your terms a bit amd got different results, now the search gives me junk so I alter the phrase and same junk shows up. So it is not as effective at doing a deep search these days that actually matches the search terms.

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you tried searching incognito? I find the junk is generally tied to profiles Google has on me; they decide based on the data they’ve built up what I should really be looking for.

        Searching incognito tends to return results closer to what I got 5 years ago.

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I run tracker control, and only essentail scripts can run, all ad stuff is totally blocked.

  • Thalestr@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    SEO and AI-generated clickbait have basically ruined most search engines. I’ve yet to find one that can really tackle this properly. I believe Kagi offers higher quality results but I can’t really verify that myself as I don’t have an account with them.

      • asap@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have the $10/mo account but I’ll disagree with @mrmanager@lemmy.today that it’s worth the money.

        Don’t get me wrong I wouldn’t go back to Google/DDG, but while I can afford Kagi’s monthly cost I don’t believe that everyone can, nor do I think it’s an appropriate cost for a search engine.

        I feel like I am an average search user, and I easily burn through 1000 searches a month. I’ll possibly be upgrading to the $25/mo unlimited account.

        If you’re used to doing conversion searches like “100 USD in EUR”, or “2.5g in oz”, or even “20 * 12%” - you get charged for each of those. That doesn’t seem so reasonable to me.

        • aksdb@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I also considered Kagi a bit and I think it might work if I start to change my search behavior. I got too used to abusing search engines as a quicker way to open websites (I could use bookmarks for that) or for bangs (I could use the browser itself for that).

          If I managed to untrain myself from this and start using tools for their core-purpose, the limits of Kagi might indeed be more than enough. But currently I am too lazy for such a deep change in my daily workflows.

          • asap@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            If I managed to untrain myself from this and start using tools for their core-purpose, the limits of Kagi might indeed be more than enough. But currently I am too lazy for such a deep change in my daily workflows.

            Exactly - exactly my problem. And why I’m probably going to reluctantly upgrade to the $25/mo unlimited. It just irks me that I feel like I’m getting ripped off :P

            Imagine installing and opening a separate units conversions app just to find something that used to be an instant search away.

        • mrmanager@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I understand if you can’t afford it. Money doesn’t grow on trees in this world. But Kagi has been very transparent about the reason for the costs - it’s what they need to charge to not lose money, since they don’t sell your user data or track you.

          It’s unrealistic to think that having a search engine is free, and the reason Google is free is because it tracks you and sells your data to advertisers, and probably also makes sure you get search results that benefit those advertisers. It’s quite simply a bad choice to use an ad company to search the web.

          Kagi also had a blog post about search usage, where they used googles search statistics to determine that the average person searches 3 or 4 times per day (90 to 120 times per month). This amount (100 searches) is free on Kagi.

          300 searches costs 5 dollars.

          If you are doing 1000 searches per month, that’s as much as myself and I work as a programmer / devops guy. We search a lot. That’s much more than the average person. We are in the top 1% actually. Nice to be there for something right? :) Cost for us is 10 dollars.

          I couldn’t find anything about your claim that conversion would cost extra, not on the pricing page and not in the FAQ section. I also did a few conversation searches and there was no info about additional price. Can you link to where it says that?

          • asap@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I couldn’t find anything about your claim that conversion would cost extra, not on the pricing page and not in the FAQ section. I also did a few conversation searches and there was no info about additional price. Can you link to where it says that?

            Just look at your billing page and do a few of those searches. You will see they count as a paid search - nothing special you need to look for.

            I’m not saying they charge extra for them, just that they charge for them like other searches. Doing math in the address bar is so second-nature to me now, and it seems a bit silly for Kagi to charge me for working out what 2 * 8 is.

            Kagi has been very transparent about the reason for the costs - it’s what they need to charge to not lose money, since they don’t sell your user data or track you.

            I’ve seen their posts on this, but the question is how accurate that data is. 80 searches costing Kagi $1 doesn’t intuitively feel reasonable, but perhaps it is the truth. Google’s search API is $1 per 200 queries, and you would assume they make a profit at that pricing: https://developers.google.com/custom-search/v1/overview#pricing

            Of all the subscriptions I have, this one seems like the least value for money for me personally, when I can get for example 5TB of cloud storage for less cost.

            It’s not that I’m comparing no-search to search, it’s that I’m comparing the incremental improvement from DDG to Kagi, and considering whether that improvement is worth $10 or $25 a month.

            • mrmanager@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Ah sorry, I misunderstood you. Yes they count as a search.

              I don’t think you can compare pricing to Google. They make profits by combining any payment with selling your data for profit. There is no way Kagi can compete with that since they don’t sell your data.

              To me, search is the most important thing I use the internet for. I just think it’s reasonable to pay a good competitor that doesn’t sell your data and provides excellent search. But if you can’t pay them, of course that’s fine. Maybe you need 10 dollars for something else. But for me, Im not in the financial zone where I even miss 10 dollars or notice it’s gone.

              • asap@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                To me, search is the most important thing I use the internet for

                I like this framing. That might help me come to terms with their cost 👍

                • mrmanager@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  It’s honestly why I’m paying for it.

                  I also pay for email for the same reason. :)

                  For email, Fastmail is just excellent. I use their email aliases function a lot. So you can one-click generate an email to use when you sign up on a service and when you don’t use that service anymore, delete the email address.

                  Makes it impossible for them to sign you up on advertising lists since you can just delete that email address if they annoy you.

      • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I got work to pay for it. It is pretty good, and I like the lenses function (focus on just forums or other ways to sort). I can’t say that it’s necessarily better in general than startpage.com, which is anonomized google (gets you out of the filter bubble though). I feel like Kagi is very slightly better, maybe 10 percent at most.

        I also don’t love the hard ID they have on you for payment. They claim not to track you but they certainly can, and I’d argue better than Google can if you use startpage.com or whatever anonomized version.

          • jmp242@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Interesting - I never thought of that, mostly because the overhead is kind of insane (and I don’t actually think bitcoin is anonymous, but in this case good enough). I was thinking for your average person, they’re going to pull out a credit card or debit card which is a hard ID. Certainly more than if they browse to startpage.com for instance.

            • asap@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              and I don’t actually think bitcoin is anonymous

              You can pay with XMR:

              I definitely agree with you though, it is a negative for Kagi. It would be nice if they let you pay direct via crypto or other methods.

      • mrmanager@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Worth every dollar. The quality is so good that you will switch and forget Google exists. I haven’t used Google search in 6 months even once.

  • Storksforlegs@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 year ago

    It hasn’t worked for a while. Even a year ago it was considerably better.

    I can’t believe it, but Bing is now the better search engine. What is happening to the world?!

  • Rottcodd@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    1 year ago

    I find google works fine if I’m just looking for general information on a simple topic, because it will dependably return a link to the wikipedia entry and a few of the most popular sites.

    And I find that it’s pretty much useless for specific information about narrow topics, because it’s still just going to return the same general shit.

    I’m not sure exactly how the change worked, but some time back (it’s been a year or two now, and maybe more - it’s just something that I sort of slowly realized had happened), they shifted to a system that made Google Fu essentially useless.

    It used to be the case that you could define the importance of search terms by the order in which you listed them and make some effectively required by putting quotation marks around them.

    But starting a couple of years back, it’s been generally ignoring search term order and quotation marks, and instead giving priority to specific common (and certainly not coincidentally common marketing) terms.

    To anthropomorphize, it’s as if it’s developed a cripplingly narrow focus. So if, for instance, you’re looking for the title of some specific movie, it doesn’t matter how many other search terms you include or what order you list the terms in - if you include the term “movie,” that’s what it’s going to focus on. So if you’re lucky, you might get the actual movie you’re looking for, but it’s absolutely guaranteed that you’re going to get streaming services and “18 movies with real blood” style clickbait.

    • Rashnet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s complete shit right now. 5 or more years ago I could quickly find an answer to a very technical question with no problem. Now it is useless for anything. Just today I was looking for a shop near me that can perform a front end alignment on my RV, I searched for “Tractor Trailer front end alignment near me”. The entire first page is either tire shops that do not offer front end alignments, car tire shops that don’t even sell the correct size tires I would need for a tractor trailer, or shops 2000 miles away in various directions. It’s horrible and I think it would be faster to look in the yellow pages for what I need in this case. I never found a shop using google.

      Also today I was searching for the tires I need in the shopping tab there were ads for tires that google had labeled as wal-mart but when I would click the link it would take me to a Chinese scam site.

  • SimonSing@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google is almost impossible to use when I search for solutions to maths problems. The first few pages are dominated by those sites gaming Google’s algorithm and their articles usually don’t help.

  • TheOtherJake@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google is broken because AI is making it obsolete. I bet in 10 years google will be a historical footnote.

    • Troy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      AI is driving me mad. Pages and pages of generative text filled articles with nothing to say drive all the humans away.

      Ironically, because Lemmy is so hard to index for search engines, it keeps the AI content spammers away. Mostly. So far.

      • Unruffled [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hard agree with you on that. AI generated articles are a disaster for the internet. There’s just no quality control any more, especially when actual authoritative sites are no longer in the top search results. Now we’ve got tons more crap-tier content on the internet and no way to differentiate it from the useful content.

    • phi1997@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re talking about the AI that provides accurate-sounding results but can’t fact-check and is also used to generate the kind of spam that’s constantly being pushed by search engines, right?

      • TheOtherJake@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not exactly. Stupid people with advanced tools make stupid outputs. Venture capital is pushing the propaganda sauce hard and a lot of stupid people are jumping on AI as a corporate trend. These are the idiots.

        The tools are next level. We are on the edge of this tech becoming a really big deal. There are several research papers making breakthroughs regularly and making double digit percentile improvements on efficiency and accuracy. The reason it is a big deal is because you can have around 1/4 of the knowledge of the entire internet running on hardware as powerful as a current flagship phone. Sure it lies around 1/2 the time, but these are problems that are being solved. Like, the latest and greatest models are ancient history in a matter of 2-3 weeks. To be honest, have a casual conversation with an offline and uncensored LLM. You may know it is lying from time to time, but if you’re being objective, so are most humans you encounter under casual circumstances. The sociological function and potential value of this tech is pretty powerful medicine. Like if you need someone to talk to, or to talk out an issue in private, this is a way to make that happen.

      • gelberhut@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well. Some time ago one had similar arguments about manually categorized web site catalogs and algorithm driven search engines.

        Today’s ai are not areplacment, but in ten years … rather likely.

  • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    My Google results change like the weather. Sometimes I can’t take it anymore and use Bing but quickly switch back as it’s worse. There’s no replacement yet, but you need more google Fu than ever before.

  • worfamerryman@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think google made the web worse with SEO. Sites have to be designed in ways that users and creators do not really care about so that they may show up in search results.

    If I have a site about star trek and it has all the relevant information that the user is looking for, then do not derank my site because the text is not a specific length or whatever other unrelated stuff is there.

    I think there are some things that are worth while, like I think https sites are preferred over http sites. I think that this is a good thing to promote.

      • parlaptie@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        As much as I’ve come to loathe Google, I think even that is a bit unfair to them. Search engine optimization is a result of the existence of search engines, because being at the top of the results is always worth good money.

        Back before Google was the top dog, there were numerous search engines, and I’m pretty sure people shared tips on how to get further up on the results even then, they just didn’t use the term SEO yet.

        Google became the dominant search engine because it gave better results than anyone else, because it wasn’t so easy to manipulate your ranking on the results. But there were always sites that wanted to be on top even when they shouldn’t be. Google stayed ahead of their game for some decades, but now it looks like they can’t or won’t keep it up anymore.

        • BlueNine@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wonder what it would like if they rolled out the OG circa 1998 page-rank algorithm on todays web. What would that algorithm find if we ran it now? Would it be garbage or would it undercut all the SEO and find good stuff?

          I have a hunch that the current search is bad, not because they cannot do better, but because it is profitable for it to be this bad. The most powerful SEO tool is probably your checkbook.

          • tburkhol@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s definitely an arms race - if it’s cheaper to pay an SEO to get your pages shown, then you pay the SEO; if it’s cheaper to pay Google advertising, then you pay to play. I’m sure Google is constantly tweaking their algorithm to filter SEO techniques to get better, authentic results, but it seems like a losing battle at this point.

  • DidacticDumbass@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have been using AI chat exclusively for searching for at least the past 3 days.

    It is so much better in every possible way for simple factual questions, especially ChatGPT and Google Bard. Great for shopping. Microsoft Bing is okay, but you have to choose the right personality.

    Sidenote: I KNOW using Google, and the other companies I will mention, is the antithesis of freedom and privacy. Yet, they are incredibly powerful tools that are getting implemented everywhere, so my curiousity has led me down an honestly fun rabbit hole.

    The other AI that really surpised me is Opera Aria. Like Bing, it is using ChatGPT-4 and integrating real-time information. It just feels smarter, or perhaps more professional?

    The caveat with all these except maybe Bard which, uses its own system, are very good at shutting down questions it does not want to answer. It feels weird and wrong when it happens, like it just saved you from asking something immoral, or at least too many questions about the tech.

    Strange experience overall.


    TL;DR AI chatbots are great at parsing the internet to get you answers with reasonable accuracy and relevancy when old-fashioned search can be tedious or fruitless.

    • Creesch@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bing and Google Bard keep disappointing me. Bing for some reason only picks up on half of what I ask. Which is extremely odd as it is supposedly is ChatGPT based and ChatGPT gives pretty good answers on the same queries. The only problem with the latter is that a lot of it is of course outdated.

      Bard might just be broken for me. I keep getting I'm a text-based AI, and that is outside of my capabilities. or similar responses.

      • DidacticDumbass@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get that too drom Bard sometimes, but it is for specific queries. I think the key is working on the prompt until it gets it. Sometimes you need to start over with a new chat.

        Bing does not work like ChatGPT despite having the same base, even in creative mode. No idea why. However I like creative mode when I don’t just dont want to see links embedded. I also love taking advantage of free Dall-E.

        Bard is great for anything that can be put into a list or chart, like comparisons. Literally put in a chart.

        I am dissapointed in that I have not been able to get a single mathematic equation produced (like famous ones), but I know they can?

        If you get the chance and willing to download a full ass browser, Opera has Aria, which is like the cleanest version of ChatGPT I have seen. Just the formatted answers with hyperlinks are worth it. It is good. It is hard to explain, but Aria mostly just works. It is closer to Bard in responses, and does what you want out of Bing without messing with convo styles.

        Whatever prompts that Bing put for the convo style may be messing with the results.

        All things said, I switch between them often, depending on my needs. It takes some time but I have built my intuition of which one will give the best response for the prompt, but I often just search the prompt in all of them.

        Anyways, I hope you find more success using them!

        • Creesch@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am dissapointed in that I have not been able to get a single mathematic equation produced (like famous ones), but I know they can?

          Well, my understanding is that they actually can’t. LLM’s do “language” mostly based on what is called “next word prediction” so they basically look at the word and predict what the next most logical word would be. (Somewhat simplified). So numbers to them are not numbers but words, which is why they are fairly bad at them.

          Opera has Aria, which is like the cleanest version of ChatGPT

          Pass, not sure what stake the chinese owners have these days but Opera is a bit too… feature rich in everything.

          I do like working with just chat.openai.com for simple stuff. It is great at helping my debug things in areas I don’t quite have all the knowledge I’d like. For example, I had to work on a shell script earlier in bash. Something I don’t do often and as an added bonus it needed to work on both macOS machines and the bash version shipped with “git bash” on windows. MacOS GNU utils already function slightly differently at times, but git bash on windows is entirely broken in some areas. Where yesterday I spend an hour trying to find something relevant based on my input and the error I got through google chatGPT just managed to point out the pain point right away.

          And that is where I feel chatGPT (in this case anyway) does a great job, troubleshooting issues about things that are not necessarily bleeding edge. I just presented it with a clear problem and a bit of context and asked why that could be the case. It also got it wrong a few times, but that is fine, it did safe me a bunch of time in the end.

          • DidacticDumbass@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            For sure that is a limitation of an LLM. I was hoping the capabilities of Google or Bing would overcome that with extended formatting.

            I am ignorant of the ownership of Opera, so I will reserve judgement. I will say that the browser is great, despite its problem foundation.

            That is an awesome usecase. ChatGPT lets you get niche and weird, which isnwhere it is most productive.

            ChatGPT has the issue that it has no date beyond September 2021, which is not typically an issue.

  • shoe@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nothing to add to this discussion except that savannahxyz is a treasure

  • Troy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    tl;dw: song about google being broken

    “I have to add to word reddit to every goddamn search to read content made by humans”

    Oh the ironing. That line won’t age well now will it :)

    • LongbottomLeaf@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      2min 30sec is too long? Tell me it was the YT ads not 2m30s.

      But I did appreciate the reddit irony.

  • HisNoodlyServant@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Seems to mostly work fine for me. However Google as a company is a fucking mess so doesn’t surprise me people have problems. I have had more problems with my Pixel 7 and Google Maps seems to getting worse and worse.

  • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What’s your opinion? Does google really “not work” anymore?

    Depends what you’re searching for. For some searches I’ve given up on using it. For example I just purchased a new TV and one of the features wasn’t working. It took me several hours of Googling to figure out how to fix it — almost every result offered by Google didn’t contain an answer to my question.

    Are there any better search engines?

    ChatGPT works well for some searches. Especially if you pay for GPT-4.

    It’s pretty impressive how ChatGPT is better than Google despite never being designed as a replacement for Google. I think when someone applies the same technology to a proper search product, the result will be really awesome. Time will tell who manages to pull that off - it might even be Google.

    Why did the quality of search results go down?

    The main issue, I think, is all the websites these days that exist exclusively to show banner ads. Many of them are packed with information that Google’s algorithm determines might be relevant to the user, but the algorithm is wrong.

    The websites want you to click on an Ad, and you’re a lot more likely to click an Ad if you give up, don’t find what you’re looking for, and decide to buy a new weight loss gadget instead.

    I’m sure part of the problem is Google itself is an ad company. A lot of the things they could do to fix this issue would harm their own revenue.

  • Pietson@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    did not expect to see a savannahXYZ video on my feed here this morning, love to see it though.