Please understand that this is the next ‘SEO’ shit.
It was going to be this from the very start.
If I say no and revoke my consent, and they do it anyway …
Can you afford enough lawyers to prove it?
Justice is the original pay to win game. Seems its out of our budget though.
Let’s DuckDuckGOOOOOOO!
DuckDuckGo is just Bing. Which is uh… going from Google to Microsoft. Maybe not much better either
For now.
DDG gets search results from Bing, owned by Microsoft. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the later did the same as Google did.
That’s technically true, but it’s as misleading as saying they get their search results from Yandex. Their results are aggregated from several search engines, not just Bing. They also have their own web crawler, DuckDuckBot, which absolutely respects RobotRules.
Fair point.
Where is your evidence for that? It used to be Bing and Yandex, but now it’s just Bing. They use other non search engine APIs and do a small amount of crawling AFAIK. Details of who uses what here: https://seirdy.one/posts/2021/03/10/search-engines-with-own-indexes/
I read it on their sources page at some point, but it looks like that page has changed since last I looked.
Lol… Peasants will accept it…
Sundar the creep knows it.
As I understand it, this is only about using search results for summaries. If it’s just that and links to the source, I think it’s OK. What would be absolutely unacceptable is to use the web in general as training data for text and image generation (=write me a story about topic XY).
If it’s just that and links to the source, I think it’s OK.
No one will click on the source, which means the only visitor to your site is Googlebot.
What would be absolutely unacceptable is to use the web in general as training data for text and image generation.
This has already happened and continues to happen.
No one will click on the source, which means the only visitor to your site is Googlebot.
That was the argument with the text snippets from news sources. Publishers successfully lobbied for laws to be passed in many countries that required search engine operators to pay fees. It backfired when Google removed the snippets from news sources that demanded fees from Google. Their visitors dropped by a massive amount, 90% or so, because those results were less attractive to Google users to click on than the nicer results with a snippet and a thumbnail. So “No one will click on the source” has already been disproven 10 or so years ago when the snippet issue was current. All those publishers have entered a free of charge licensing agreement with Google and the laws are still in place. So Google is fine, upstart search engines are not because those cannot pressure the publishers into free deals.
This has already happened and continues to happen.
With Gemini?
The context is not the same. A snippet is incomplete and often lacking important details. It’s minimally tailored to your query unlike a response generated by an LLM. The obvious extension to this is conversational search, where clarification and additional detail still doesn’t require you to click on any sources; you simply ask follow up questions.
With Gemini?
Yes. How do you think the Gemini model understands language in the first place?
The context is not the same.
It’s not the same but it’s similar enough when, as the article states, it is solely about short summaries. The article may be wrong, Google may be outright lying, maybe, maybe, maybe.
Google, as by far the web’s largest ad provider, has a business incentive to direct users towards the web sites, so the website operators have to pay Google money. Maybe I’m missing something but I just don’t see the business sense in Google not doing that and so far I don’t see anything approximating convincing arguments.
Yes. How do you think the Gemini model understands language in the first place?
Licensed and public domain content, of which there is plenty, maybe even content specifically created by Google to train the data. “the Gemini model understands language” in itself hardly is proof of any wrongdoing. I don’t claim to have perfect knowledge or memory, so it’s certainly possible that I missed more specific evidence but “the Gemini model understands language” by itself definitively is not.
Look at you, changing my mind with your logicking ways. I think information should be free anyway, but I thought media companies were being at least remotely genuine about the impact here. Forgot that lobbyists be lobbying and that Google wouldn’t have let them win if it didn’t benefit them.
that latter will be the case rather sooner than later I’m afraid. It’s just a matter of time with Google.
that latter will be the case rather sooner than later I’m afraid. It’s just a matter of time with Google.
If that will actually be the case and passes legal challenges, basically all copyright can be abolished which would definitively have some upsides but also downsides. All those video game ROM decompilation projects would be suddenly in the clear, as those are new source code computer-generated from copyrighted binary code, so not really different from a AI generated image based on a copyrighted image used as training data. We could also ask Gemini write a full-length retelling of Harry Potter and just search, replace all trademarked names, and sell that shit. Evil companies could train an AI on GNU/Linux source codes and tell it to write an operating system. Clearly derived work from GPL code but without any copyright to speak of, all that generated code could be legally closed. I don’t like that.
I’ve been really happy with Kagi since switching.
Same. It’s amazing. I really like the feature where you can prioritise or deprioritise search results from certain websites.
It’s definitely better…but. Thanks to Google SEO the internet it’s bringing you results from is still filled with shit
Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t Kagi still uses google/bing results?
I might be wrong, but they meta-search across multiple providers, including their own. The real benefit is that YOU can choose which search subjects to prioritize when trying to find something specific.
For normal search stuff, this feels like “old Google” (no ai spam). For detailed searching, its better than any other engine I’ve used.
Same! I swore I wouldn’t pay for a search engine, but I feel like it’s absolutely worth it, considering the current state of things.
Oh look, more anticompetitive shenanigans.
Break Google up. Bring the full force of antitrust down on them.
Anything else is an unmitigated disaster waiting to happen.
I’m not sure of the advantages of showing up in Google search results. It seems like something that I wouldn’t want to happen anyway.
Bing to finally overtake Google? Inconceivable!
Don’t forget Bing’s Copilot. IIRC, Bing also brings an AI-generated “summary” whenever you use Bing search.
This makes me mad…
We do really need to figure how to make some kind of decentralized search engine.
I hope it happens one day, but that’s an almost insurmountable task given the scale.
Take the entirety of the fediverse, and it’s entire history, and you’re probably talking a days worth of search engine indexing compute & storage.
The scale is large and the fediverse is incredibly small. Keeping my fingers crossed, but definitely not holding my breath.
In the meantime, I’ll use Kagi.
Some discussion on that here: https://lemmy.world/comment/11859761
Can someone explain why the fuck Google is pushing this so hard? Generative AI is not a general intelligence, and useless for concrete facts. Google has already demonstrated how shitty it is for information, and the people with the knowledge to work on the project have to know this.
So why the fuck are they all full steam ahead on something that will always be useless for them?
Their line goes up when they show they’re investing in AI, and it goes down when it looks like they’re falling behind or not investing enough in it.
TBH, a lot of times I find myself interacting with ChatGPT instead of searching. It’s overhyped, but it’s useful.
AI is hype.
They’ve recently signed a deal with Reddit for AI parsable data. Reddit reciprocated by allowing Google to be the only indexable search engine.
Google now thinks it can do the same to literally everyone else.
Googling is pretty damn mainstream.
Don’t give Google your data, then don’t be included in googles search results. It’s like a flip of their previous trade with reddit, except it’s not a trade. It’s extortion.Reddit never gave Google traffic. They gave them content and data.
And Google thinks it can withdraw traffic from other sites unless they get data in return.
Google is a monopoly.
Literally extortionMagic beans.
That’s actually a good news. Maybe we’re able to revert the internet to the times before the Eternal September happened
This will never happen. We might get some of the issues more regulated, and people may move away from others, but you can’t put the Furies back into the box. Things will change, but we will never have the early internet again.
I read that as “you can’t put the Furries back in the box” and it still worked
We can, closed communities with some effort to enter the group. I pretty much ditched most main stream social media and use what it used to be mailing lists and discord servers. It’s not about technology. Internet and access used to be simply exclusive and we have to create exclusive channels to communicate about f.e. arts, history, technology or even occult where there is no “free riders” with no knowledge. That’s what I mean and this may happen imo. Quality over quantity
Lemmy was at some point this pre-September place. Since then, it changed quite a bit.
I think we’ll always have to face either Eternal September or walls and restrictions everywhere, making it hard to join and discouraging many genuinely good folks.
Our best best is to influence the Internet culture at large, since there’s no grand influx of people on the Internet overall anymore. Of course, we go against algorithmic rage machines, but this is a fight worth having. And which place if not Fediverse is a good place to start.
