upvote
No. If I search "Toyota RAV4" what I mean is Toyota RAV4. If I meant Mazda CX-50 I would have typed "Mazda CX-50." If I wanted information about various mid-size SUVs, rather than one in particular, I'd have searched "midsize SUVs."

The number of times I have searched something, got back something I did not ask for, and found that helpful, rounds down to zero. It's actively destructive to the platforms that allow this kind of hijacking of search terms.

reply
Agreed. Also a search along the lines “cars like Toyota RAV4" when I intend to broaden the search to other equivalents, because I don’t know the terminology.
reply
Are you saying that because it’s across company boundaries? Or would you be similarly upset if one result was for a Toyota Highlander? Or for a Toyota RAV4 XSE but not the LE trim

I gotta say, I think you’re in the minority. I suspect most folks appreciate the cross shopping suggestion

reply
Yes! It's very frustrating when I think I'm browsing several variations of a single product, only to realize that some of the results are a totally different product, the brand doesn't affect it either way. I'm fine seeing results for multiple trims if I didn't specify one.
reply
>I'm fine seeing results for multiple trims if I didn't specify one.

And when you DO specify one, but get results for something else entirely?

reply
The day searches started giving us ads instead of what we asked for (as opposed to in addition to what we asked for) was the day they stopped being useful. Which for Google was many years ago. This is not "cross shopping suggestions", it's an abuse of a monopoly for profit.

Literally everyone I know feels this way, even if they don't care about it as passionately. No one "appreciates" being openly manipulated to their financial detriment.

reply
[flagged]
reply
I think that it’s fine, and good, to critique the way that corporations do their business. That’s kinda one of the core tenets of capitalism, no?
reply
That’s pay to spam. Letting advertisers determine relevance of their product to a keyword is not exactly a user enhancing experience. When searching for rav4, i give you the ad for taylor swift concert, obviously understanding you can pay for it. This is spamming. “Relevant” ads should be determined by content producers
reply
Would you, while shopping for a car, decide to buy very expensive concert tickets? Neither would I. So this campaign would have very low CTR and would perform poorly.

It would only perform well if you identified some actual source of latent demand. For example, maybe many people searching for Taylor Swift concert tickets would actually be happy with movie tickets to see a simulcast. At which point, you are providing real information to some searchers.

We can debate and disagree about whether this is something you want in your search results, but it’s not spam. Spam exists because it doesn’t have to compete in an auction.

reply
This is the most baffling comment I think I’ve ever read
reply
Did you know that the sum of the natural numbers is -1/12?
reply
You search for Toyota RAV4, and you get an ad for whoever paid Google the most money to fingerprint your profile and bias your purchase decision. Since when did we start trusting everything we see on the Internet?
reply
In any retail webstore, or even on Spotify, YouTube, etc. all the searches are infuriating today.

If I search for specific terms then I get a menu of slop to choose from. Search isn't built to serve the searcher at all. Search is meant to surface things that are promoted, hyped, advertised, or paid for in some way.

So you search Amazon for stuff and a lot of crap added on to it. Any retail site's filters are useless for filtering out what you don't want to see or casting a net for desirable features. I swear--search for "bananas" at a grocery store and you'll get results for ice cream and baby food and Minions merchandise and organic pears?

This behavior has already crept into LLM responses. I often request that they compile a list of the top-5 or top-10 according to some criteria. And it never fails that they cannot resist giving me outliers and things that don't fit by any means. Now I don't know what influences an LLM to give stupid non-matching results, but I know they do. Is RLHF already baking-in advertising and sponsorship? I wouldn't rule it out.

Case in point: the other day I was thinking of Amy Schumer but couldn't remember her name. So I struck up a convo with Copilot, and described Schumer by profession, personality, and physical attributes. Copilot first suggested a slender Black woman. Then Diablo Cody. And eventually compiled me a list of 5-7 people who were nothing like Amy Schumer. Never once even thought to mention her. Once I surfaced her name by other means, I went back and scolded Copilot, just so I could feel smug and better about myself. But it's genuinely surreal.

reply