• Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    AI is the future of search and I dont see anyway that changes. The user experience of AI search is way to good, average users love the summary at the top of their search. Almost every report i’ve seen shows over 50% of people using AI for search and that tracks with what I see in people i know in real life.

    I’m a DDG user and I do not want them to handicap themselves to pass a purity test.

    • AstralPath@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Then opt in. We shouldn’t have to opt out to avoid padding the AI numbers.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        33 minutes ago

        Its a generalized product targeting average people. Average people dont care AI/No AI they want the results and they use the AI summaries. If DDG hid it then they would just think it doesnt exist and go use google which provides them faster more convenient results.

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      AI is the future

      Thought terminating cliches are the future of online discourse.

      The user experience of AI search is way to good

      Search engine companies went out of their way to make normal searches worse, and then introduced AI search to keep you on their sites.

      I thought everybody at this point understood enshittification at this point, but if not: of course a project at the first stage of enshittification acts better than a different product at the third stage of it.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        37 minutes ago

        Its not a thought terminating cliche if you didnt cut the next word out. You can argue if AI is the future of search, I think there is a strong case that its proven very good at general information retrieval.

        How did search engine companies go out of their way to make normal searches worse? I search I get relevant results and its been that way for the past 20 years. Nothing has changed that has made search worse than it was 5 years ago. The only change is that people have recently gotten a choice between a google search or a chatgpt question and they were increasingly choosing chatgpt. fast forward to current day and that divide has only increased.

    • Zarobi@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Personally I actually like the A.I. summaries… IF it shows its sources. That way it essentially acts as it should, a summary of the search results, and I can click the link that actually is relevant to what I wanted to find in the first place. It skips that step where you have to open the first 5 links and comb through them to find which one is the useful one.

      I know most people don’t click those links and just trust the summary directly, but it’s important to me personally. Unfortunately those links only appear sometimes, often you just get plain text with no links.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        34 minutes ago

        On DDG you get the sources its summarizing from. Im not sure about google, i dont use it.

    • PRIMEcavitationfetishist@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Its wrong though. Its wrong so fucking often. There’s no way to fix that. I stopped using ddg because of this. Pandering to right wing idiots does not necessarily mean being smart, that’s thatcherite Nazi coddling lies.