upvote
Yeah that's increasingly been my feeling as well. I have to keep prefacing my Kagi recommendations with, "web search is less and less useful every year, but..."

I still appreciate being able to customize rankings, bangs, and redirects. But with how utterly shit the web is overall, any web search is basically only good if you know the site(s) the answer(s) will be on. When you're searching for something novel-to-you, even Kagi is just going to show you a full page of unregulated slop on the dumbest, just-registered-this-year domains. Real information is increasingly limited to small islands of trust.

reply
I don’t like any search engines now :(
reply
It's because the search engine is being eaten by the LLM. I'm not suggesting that it's a perfect substitute. It's just what I feel is happening.
reply
Naw this is a pre LLM problem.
reply
Yep. SEO spam has been a thing for decades.

LLMs have supercharged it though, it's so much easier to create dozens or hundreds or thousands of ultra low effort LLM written webpages and websites that it ever was before LLMs.

reply
I'm not talking about LLMs diluting search. I'm saying users are using LLMs to search more than search itself, including in search engines.
reply
more like LLM garbage are rotting search engines from the inside out
reply
I hadn't really noticed anything like this until you pointed it out. My main use for Kagi is to pin Wikipedia results... I just tried searching for "nanoclaw" on Kagi (I'm in the UK so results biased towards there) and got:

1. nanoclaw[dot]net (!)

2. github.com/qwibitai/nanoclaw which looks like a ripoff?

3. Three videos, at least one of which looks like slop with crypto ads

4. github.com/gavrielc/nanoclaw which I presume is the real repo judging from the name?

5. Three "interesting finds" the top one of which is nanoclaw.dev, but with the title "Don't trust AI agents" because it's a blog post from that site

6. A fork of the qwibitai/nanoclaw repo

reply
> 2. github.com/qwibitai/nanoclaw which looks like a ripoff?

That is literally the GitHub repo the original article shows as being "real".

reply