upvote

points

by OutOfHere9 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby kcbanner9 hours ago|
next
[-]
> users want the results intelligently synthesized into a text response with references rather than as raw results.

The reason I pay for Kagi is that I specifically don't want this to occur.

reply
upvoteby OutOfHere9 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
If you pay for a service (web search) that 99.9% use for free, you're an extreme outlier, and not necessarily a justifiable one either. After all, DDG, Google and various others still have raw results for free.
reply
upvoteby Workaccount29 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
How much do you technologically relate to the average person on the street though?

Every person I have seen (outside the tiny tech bubble) google something has just read the AI overview without skipping a beat.

reply
upvoteby yepitwas9 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
That's worrisome since I've seen those be for-sure wrong a pretty high percentage of the time.

[EDIT] Incidentally, are there any sites that do actual web search any more, better than Yandex? I'd rather avoid a Russian site if I can, but there are whole topics where it's impossible to find anything useful on heavily "massaged" allegedly-Web-search-but-not-really sites like Google and DDG (Bing), but I can find what I want on page 1 or 2 of a Yandex search. Is Kagi as good as that, or is their index simply ignoring a whole bunch of the Web like so many others? I don't mind paying.

reply
upvoteby degamad8 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Google "Web" results (not the default results you get when you search) still seem okay for me. You can force them with the udm=14 url trick, or select the "Web" tab in the results. No AI, no images or shopping results, and slightly better text results.
reply
upvoteby franktankbank8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yep, same here. Ask it "should I wash venison tenderloin" and you get an initial "No, because" followed by a generally "yes its important to clean including with water" in the longer description. Wow a self contradictory answer! Good job!
reply
upvoteby jkestner9 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
We’re being force fed them. I’m an AI hater and I catch myself reading those sometimes.

Yes, people want the answer directly. Google wants you to stay on their site to read some mishmash. I think the ideal would be to immediately go to the source’s site.

reply
upvoteby throwmeaway2229 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
At this point the web is also so centralized you only need 3 bookmarks these days (your news, youtube and Amazon)

A search is just learning what you don't know and AI does a better job than search has ever done for me - and I'm in tech.

reply
upvoteby freeopinion6 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> users want the results intelligently synthesized into a text response with references rather than as raw results

This leads directly to another big change.

People used to submit their sites to search engines and now they might actively block search engines. So a search engine author might have to spend a lot of effort in adversarial games.

reply
upvoteby ricardo818 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
>Pagerank

Also a lot of site owners are reluctant to link out. So much so that 'nofollow' had been reduced to a hint rather than a directive.

reply
upvoteby iamacyborg9 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
> Moreover, as a default, users want the results intelligently synthesized into a text response with references rather than as raw results.

Citation needed

reply
upvoteby OutOfHere8 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You mean all the users of chat services aren't evidence? Chat services increasingly incorporate web links for references in their responses, and this is as the users seek. The tide continues to shift from traditional search to LLM synthesis.
reply
upvoteby iamacyborg8 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I suspect there are more users of traditional search than there are of llm chat apps.
reply
upvoteby freeopinion6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I suspect that chat apps dominate (80+%?) the under-20 demographic, and have a sizable chunk of the under-30 demographic. Within the next five years it will probably represent 50+% of total search traffic. Maybe it already does. It makes sense that any search site that wants to be in the game tomorrow would keep racing down the AI chat path.
reply