upvote

points

by thelastgallon8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby burnte7 hours ago|
next
[-]
Yep, this is exactly why some companies simply don't work with Walmart.
reply
upvoteby johnny_canuck3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
But ultimately that strategy is good for the consumer right?

In this context, if Google is going to give me the recipe without having to scroll through the story, that seems like a win to me.

The ad-revenue driven Internet of web 2.0 is finally dead and I'm not sure I'm all that sad.

reply
upvoteby redsparrow3 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Without some way to generate revenue, people aren't going to publish recipes (for Google to scrape into their AI.) Maybe we could live without more recipes being fed into the machine, but there are many other types of content that will suffer the same fate.

It would be nice to find something better than an ad-revenue driven web, but I'm not sure this is it. We'll find out I guess...

reply
upvoteby bbondo2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> people aren't going to publish recipes

Sure they are. I can attest that musicians will gladly publish their music even when no recompense is offered. Surely culinary artists are the same.

reply
upvoteby gwbas1c1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
We just won't get countless recipe websites where you have to scroll, scroll, scroll through slop about someone's day to read a scraped recipe that every other website has.

This is just disruption.

reply
upvoteby mcphage1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
> But ultimately that strategy is good for the consumer right?

No. Temporarily it’s good for the consumer. Ultimately it is bad for the consumer, because as prices drop, so to does quality.

reply
upvoteby itsmek51 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
It's not uncommon for free things to be higher quality than cheap things, especially when we're not talking about physical goods. Think hobbyist vs hack. Selective pro bono vs quantity over quality. The former describes old internet while the latter describes much ad-supported internet. I'm not saying cheap is better than expensive, and I'm not saying everything works this way, but I do think many things do, especially for pure information that doesn't have a major capital cost associated.
reply
upvoteby Ar-Curunir2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
No, because now Google controls entirely what you see. They could decide to show you the recipe after all.

Also, at some point even the ad-laden websites will die, and then Googles sources will be extinguished.

reply
upvoteby augzodia6 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
it's because both google and walmart have too much market power
reply
upvoteby BurningFrog3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
This is tough for the manufacturer, but great for the consumer.

I think it's a good tradeoff.

reply