Google has plunged the internet into a “spiral of decline”, the co-founder of the company’s artificial intelligence (AI) lab has claimed.

Mustafa Suleyman, the British entrepreneur who co-founded DeepMind, said: “The business model that Google had broke the internet.”

He said search results had become plagued with “clickbait” to keep people “addicted and absorbed on the page as long as possible”.

Information online is “buried at the bottom of a lot of verbiage and guff”, Mr Suleyman argued, so websites can “sell more adverts”, fuelled by Google’s technology.

214 points

The part about Google isn’t wrong.

But the second half of the article, where he says that AI chatbots will replace Google search because they give more accurate information, that simply is not true.

permalink
report
reply
74 points
*

I’d say they at least give more immediately useful info. I’ve got to scroll past 5-8 sponsored results and then the next top results are AI generated garbage anyways.

Even though I think he’s mostly right, the AI techbro gameplan is obvious. Position yourself as a better alternative to Google search, burn money by the barrelful to capture the market, then begin enshitification.

In fact, enshitification has already begun; responses are comparatively expensive to generate. The more users they onboard, the more they have to scale back the quality of those responses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

ChatGPT is already getting worse at code commenting and programming.

The problem is that enshitification is basically a requirement in a capitalist economy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Even if AI magically got to the point of providing accurate and good results, I would still profoundly object to using it.

First, it’s a waste of resources. The climate impact of AI is enough of a reason why we should leave it dead until we live in a world with limitless energy and water.

Second, I don’t trust a computer to select my sources for me. Sometimes you might have to go through a few pages, but with traditional search engines at least you are presented with a variety of sources and you can use your god given ability of critical thinking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I don’t trust a computer to select my sources for me.

I’m not sure what you think modern search engines do, but this is pretty much it. Hell, all of the popular ones have been using AI signals for years.

You can request as many sources from an AI as you would get from Google.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Of course there are always challenges, especially with how results are ranked. I have been extremely dissatisfied with the development of search engines for years now. I find Duckduckgo to at least be less bad than Google. Currently I’m checking out Kagi, which at least lets me rank sources myself. Still on the fence though - it does seem to flirt more with AI than with transparency, which has me worried.

But absolutely, it’s not that I think the current state of search engines is great either - it just seems to me everything is getting worse and the Internet has entered a death spiral between AI and the enshittification of social media.

Then again, maybe I just reached that age where you start hating everything.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s LLMs, which is what is necessary for Chat-AI (the first “L” in there quite literally stands for Large).

Remove the stuff necessary to process natural human language and those things tend to be way smaller, especially if they’re just trained using the user’s own actions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

The climate change has become the new CP go to argument to condone the stupidest reasoning. Just like blocking Torrent sites to prevent CP, let’s block AI to prevent climate change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

I mean most top searches are AI generated bullshit nowadays anyway. Adding Reddit to a search is basically the only decent way to get a proper answer. But those answers are not much more reliable than ChatGPT. You have to use the same sort of skepticism and fact checking regardless.

Google has really gotten horrible over the years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Most of the results after the first page on Google are usually the same as the usable results, just mirrored on some shady site full of ads and malware.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I already go to ChatGPT more than Google. If you pay for it then the latest version can access the internet and if it doesn’t know the answer to something it’ll search the internet for you. Sometimes I come across a large clickbait page and I just give ChatGPT the link and tell it to get the information from it for me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

Do you fact-check the answers?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

It depends what you’re using it for as to whether you need to fact check stuff.

I’m a software developer and if I can’t remember how to do an inner join in SQL then I can easier ask ChatGPT to do it for me and I will know if it is right or not as this is my field of expertise.

If I’m asking it how to perform open heart surgery on my cat, then sure I’m probably going to want several second opinions as that is not my area of expertise.

When using a calculator do you use two different calculators to check that the first one isn’t lying?

Also, you made a massive assumption that the stuff OP was using it for was something that warranted fact checking.

I can see why you would use it. Why would I want to search Google for inner joins sql when it is going to give me so many false links that don’t give me the info in need in a concise manner.

Even time wasting searches have just been ruined. Example: Top Minecraft Java seeds 1.20. Will give me pages littered with ads or the awful page 1-10 that you must click through.

Many websites are literally unusable at this point and I use ad blockers and things like consent-o-matic. But there are still pop up ads, sub to our newsletter, scam ads etc. so much so that I’ll just leave the site and forego learning the new thing I wanted to learn.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The new release of GPT-4 searches Bing, reads the results, summarizes, and provides sources, so it’s easier to fact check than ever if you need to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
*

It’s pretty trivial to fact check an answer… You should start using this kind of bots more. Check perplexity.ai for a free version.

Sources are referenced and linked.

Don’t judge on chatgpt free version

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

give it time, algos will fuck those results as well

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They’ll need to make money with a cheap cost-per-sale, so they’ll put ads on the site. Then they’ll put promoted content in the AI chat, but it’s okay because they’ll say it’s promoted. Eventually it won’t even say it’s promoted and it will just be all ads, just like every other tech company.

Why? Because monetization leads directly to enshittification, because the users stop being the customers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

When I tried it it was never able to give me the sources of what it said. And it has given me way too many made up answers to just trust it without reasons. Having to search for sources after it said something has made me skip the middle man(machine).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

You probably tried the free version. Check perplexity.ai to see how the paid version of chatgpt works. Every source is referenced and linked.

This guy is not talking about the current version of free chatgpt. He’s talking of the much better tools that will be available in the next few years

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

ChatGPT powers Bing Chat, which can access the internet and find answers for you, no purchase necessary (if you’re not on edge, you might need to install a browser extension to access it as they are trying to push edge still).

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Do you fact-check the answers?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

That’s such a strange question. It’s almost like you imply that Google results do not need fact checking.

They do. Everything found online does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Its already happening at my work. Many are using bing AI instead of google.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Don’t worry they’ll start monetizing LLMs and injecting ads into them soon enough and we’ll be back to square one

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

because they give more accurate information, that simply is not true.

From my experience with BingChat, it’s completely true. BingChat will search with Bing and summarize the results, providing sources and all. And the results are complete garbage most of the time, since search results are filled with garbage.

Meanwhile if you ask ChatGPT, which doesn’t have Internet access, you get a far more sophisticated answer and correct answer. You can also answer follow up questions.

Web search is an absolutely terrible place for accurate information. ChatGPT in contrast consumes all the information out there, which makes it much harder for incorrect information to slip in, as information needs to be replicated frequently to stick around. It can and often is still wrong of course, but it is far better than any single website you’ll find.

And of course all of this is still very early days for LLMs. GPT was never build with correctness in mind, it was build to autocomplete text, everything else was patchwork after the fact. The future of search is AI, no doubt about that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Chatgpt flat out hallucinates quite frequently in my experience. It never says “I don’t know / that is impossible / no one knows” to queries that simply don’t have an answer. Instead, it opts to give a plausible-sounding but completely made-up answer.

A good AI system wouldn’t do this. It would be honest, and give no results when the information simply doesn’t exist. However, that is quite hard to do for LLMs as they are essentially glorified next-word predictors. The cost metric isn’t on accuracy of information, it’s on plausible-sounding conversation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Ask chatgpt “tell me the biography of the famous painter sndrtj” to see how good the bot is at hallucinating an incredible realistic story that never happened.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I suspect that client-side AI might actually be the kind of thing that filters the crap from search results and actually gets you what you want.

That would only be Chat-AI if it turns out natural language queries are better to determine the kind of thing the user is looking for than people trying to craft more traditional query strings.

I’m thinking each person would can train their AI based on which query results they went for in unfiltered queries, with some kind of user provided feedback of suitability to account for click-bait (i.e. somebody selecting a result because it looks good but it turns out its not).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

If you aren’t paying for chatgpt, give a look to perplexity.ai, it is free.

You’ll see that sources are references and linked

Don’t judge on the free version of chatgpt

Edit. Why the hell are you guys downvoting a legit suggestion of a new technology in the technology community? What do you expect to find here? Comments on steam engines?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Wow, it’s really good. Who knew that asking a bot to provide references would immediately improve the quality of the answers?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*

If you try “copilot” option, you get the full experience. It’s pretty neat because it allows for brainstorming.

It is still a very “preliminary version” experience (it often gets stuck in a small bunch of websites), because the whole thing is just few months old. But it has a lot of potential

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I dunno. There have been quite a few times where I am trying to do something on my computer and I could either spend 5 minutes searching, refining, digging through the results…or I can ask chatgpt and have a workable answer in 5 seconds. And that answer is precisely tailored to my specifics. I don’t have to assume/research how to modify a similar answer to fit my situation.

Obviously it’s dependent on the types of information you need, but for coding, bash scripting, Linux cli, or anything of that nature LLMs have been great and much better than Google searches.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

Okay but the problem with that is that LLMs not only don’t have any fidelity at all, they can’t. They are analogous to the language planning centre of your brain, which has to be filtered through your conscious mind to check if it’s talking complete crap.

People don’t realise this and think the bot is giving them real information, but it’s actually just giving them spookily realistic word-salad, which is a big problem.

Of course you can fix this if you add some kind of context engine for them to truly grasp the deeper and wider meaning of your query. The problem with that is that if you do that, you’ve basically created an AGI. That may first of all be extremely difficult and far in the future, and second of all it has ethical implications that go beyond how effective of a search engine it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Did you read my last little bit there? I said it depends on the information you are looking for. I can paste error output from my terminal into Google and try to find an answer or I can paste it into chatgpt and be, at the very least pointed in the right direction almost immediately, or even given the answer right away vs getting a stackoverflow link and parsing the responses and comments and following secondary and tiertiary links.

I absolutely understand the stochastic parrot conundrum with LLMs. They have significant drawbacks and they are far from perfect, but then neither is are Google search results. There is still a level of skepticism you have to apply.

One of the biggest mistakes people make is the idea that LLMs and websearching is a zero sum affair. They don’t replace each other. They compliment each other. Imo, google is messing up with their “ai” integration into Google search. It sets the expectation that it is an equivalent function.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I don’t need perfect. I need good enough

permalink
report
parent
reply
188 points

Google?? No, not Google. Capitalism. The same forces that drove the internet’s growth are making it so much worse than it could be. Profit motive trumps everything and drives the hellscape of engagement monetization

permalink
report
reply
65 points

Yeah, let’s absolve the individuals working at the companies who did this from all responsibility by blaming an abstract concept instead.

Capitalism may be the game, and Google may have only been one of the players, but they’re still playing dirty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points
*

Because if Google didn’t exists, another company would have done the exact same. So yes, I think its pretty accurate to blame the system that make this business plan the only one to succeed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

So the people who made those decisions just get a free pass then?

Come on, let’s hold people accountable. The system sucks, I agree, but the issues are massively exacerbated by the rich and powerful not being held accountable. So don’t let them hide behind economic ideologies or legal entities; point your finger at them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Capitalism isn’t the problem. It’s corruption. So rather than fix the problem and hold the corrupt individuals accountable, you’d rather stop the symptom. But then the source of the problem is still there and manifests itself elsewhere. But it’s easy just putting bandaids on things, so I can see why that would be the crux of your efforts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Well let’s move on from the abstract concept and blame the people uphldng the system.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Yeah, this guy just seems butthurt. If anything, Google was a prime mover and “Good guy” for about a decade or so. The Internet was fundamentally broken around the mid to late 2000s when broadband became ubiquitous and social media became popular. Tons of people online and zero way to control anything. The Internet and WWW simply weren’t built for this scale.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*

I think it’s the centralization of services that broke what the internet was in the mid-00s, and increasingly monetized every facet of it. What was internet culture in the 00s became nerd identity in the late 00s-early 10s, which over the decade became completely appropriated and commodified by capital interests.

More of the internet now is intentionally constructed to cater to a market demand. In the 00s anyone could afford to run a publicly accessible web page fully designed by them. Now that’s just having a profile on an existing social media site. Google was incredible because it helped you find the most niche type of internet site, but when everything became so consolidated it pivoted to advertising, cloud services, and venture capital. Now it’s just a monster that seeds any technology they think would help them make profit and focuses the entire sector around that motivation.

More people are now on the internet to turn a profit as well, because it’s now the primary place for business. Things you used to do on the internet for fun in your spare time are now career paths.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Not to mention he sold his company to Google. So he’s as much a contributor as Google itself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Sure. But also the tech bro culture of “I’m not responsible for the consequences of my choices, so long as there is a computational layer between those consequences and me”.

Silicon Valley, and it’s legion of brown nosers, all love to believe that “I didn’t think…” is a valid excuse, not a self-indictment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

culture of “I’m not responsible for the consequences of my choices, so long as there is a ~~computational ~~layer between those consequences and me”.

yeah because that’s totally unique to techbros who definitely ushered it in and not simply most capitalists in general

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

99% of the time it has.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Before Google there used to be shitty search engines like Altavista and Yahoo!, and there were many of them so you had to also use a “meta” search engine which was basically a program running locally on your computer which would take your search query and forward it to a dozen search engines and then shows you the aggregated results. That was one way of combining their strengths let’s say since each one of them was complete shit.

The results were still shit though because many websites were gaming those search engines as SEO at the time was extremely easy: the search engines simply looked at your meta tags (where you could spam your keywords) and the keyword density of your pages.

Then Google came with its PageRank algorithm and obsoleted the meta tags altogether. Keyword density became also less important. Google basically assigned a score manually to a dozen trustworthy and high quality websites and then let those scores propagate with some decay through its graph representing all webpages it indexed and the links between them, so if a website A with a PageRank of 10 for example linked to your website B, you’d inherit part of that PageRank (how much will depend on how many outgoing links website A has, the more outgoing links it has, the less your website B will get). It was basically a measure of trustworthiness/quality and they then ranked the webpages in their results mainly according to that score.

Things went amazingly well for a few years and no one missed the old search engines, then the SEO community found a way to abuse that new algorithm again and the idea was very simple: massively exchange links and even buy them from platforms like TextLinkAds (it’s dead now but you could look it up on Wikipedia). So we went back to the shitty results again.

Then you also have another big trouble maker: Google AdSense. The idea of this thing was to pay website owners if they accept to display Google’s ads and they’d get paid something proportional to the number of clicks/impressions the ads would get on their website. The concept was okay, website owners could make some money, Google also wins, and the ads were mostly textual and none of the annoying popup ads you’d see at the time. Then it didn’t take long for people to abuse that system too, especially with people like Joel Comm shilling the idea of making websites purely for AdSense and retiring from them, people began creating spammy websites with garbage content that’s filled with keywords just so that they can put Google AdSense ads on them, those websites were called “Made For Adsense” (MFA), and that immediately polluted the search results because you started having millions of them.

Sure Google made improvements later on and incorporated AI to have the search engine also understand the content of the webpages, which in theory should help with relevance, but due to the cat & mouse between Google and the SEO (& the MFA) community things are still shitty and the only way you can get very good results today is if you insert a site:stackoverflow.com or site:reddit.com at the end of your search query.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

We’ve come full circle. Back when search sucked before you had to remember the best site to search. Creating better queries is always a good skill.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Thank you for this beautiful yet sad journey! TIL!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

This was very informative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I switched to DuckDuckGo and have had zero issues I had on Google that would require any additional filters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
91 points

Ive had to start putting ublock origin on cuatomers systems by default. The web has become a far worse cesspool for scams than what it was a few years ago. The ads blend in with real content. The internet is a shit hole now.

permalink
report
reply
40 points

Seriously, browsing the internet without an adblocker is a horrible experience. So Firefox with ublock origin is my go to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

(aside of social network’s disinformation, conspiracies, hate breeding and false news) this is prime example of what the internet ended up as, to a regular user: how-i-experience-web-today.com

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I lol’d, this is great and too fucking accurate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
75 points

He said search results had become plagued with “clickbait” to keep people “addicted and absorbed on the page as long as possible”.

It’s not just Internet searches. Video games are designed psyop-like as well now, all to drive engagement, and more profits.

At this point we need legislation so companies cannot make products that are mentally manipulative and detrimental to their customers.

They’re getting dangerously close to “drug pushers” territory.

permalink
report
reply
39 points

“dangerously close”?

“There are only two industries that call their customers ‘users’: illegal drugs and software.” – Edward Tufte

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

“There are only two industries that call their customers ‘users’: illegal drugs and software.” – Edward Tufte

lol! I had never heard of that quote before now, ty for sharing!

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

This has been going on for decades and Blizzard started using it almost exclusively with World of Warcraft. They made the game a virtual Skinner Box (look it up and read about the experiments if you’ve never heard about it, pretty much animals will prefer to do things that they derive pleasure from instead of necessary things, like eating), and other companies followed suit. Then loot boxes and IAPs became a thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

This has been going on for decades

It seems like it’s a recent development in this decade, at least an accelerated form of it.

Almost like recently evolved in corporations got together and decided enmass to start treating their customers more like things to exploit.

Less win-win, and more win-lose.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s absolutely gotten worse, but it’s been a thing for decades.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 554K

    Comments