this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
967 points (91.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35702 readers
1375 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Google search failed to even find a hollywood movie, even after 1 hour of attempts. I don't really care about the movie, but I am terrified by the prospect that google now ceased to function on this basic level. Why is this happening?

I understand the explanations of seo and other stuff like spam content. But why are there NO relevant results at all.

I wouldn't mind having to start wading through results at page 2 or even 10 but now it utterly fails to find even the most basic things.

Things you found on the first attempt even just a year ago. Now they are effectively hidden.

To me functionally the entire internet has now vanished. I cannot access anything that I am searching for. Might as well not exist at all.

Has anybody found a way around this?

Is this on purpose? Is this an attack on the free internet, herding people to just the top 5 sites like facebook, youtube, tiktok, and so forth?

Are there search engines that still work?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 314 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Everybody is blaming SEO, which is true - but Google is also hamstrung by walled gardens.

Before Facebook, most content posted to the web was open. It could be viewed by anyone without logging in. Reddit even uses this paradigm.

But then Facebook started putting everything behind their account login and suddenly, Google can no longer spider a significant amount of the conversation going on on the Internet - and it can't link you to it either, because the link would be dead if you weren't a logged-in Facebook user. And of course it's not just Facebook.

This is why appending site:reddit.com has come into fashion in the past couple years. Reddit, being open, viewable without a login, is a fantastic source for finding people who are talking about exactly what you're searching for.

And it's another reason why Meta is cancer: all the conversations going on about whatever problem you are experiencing that made you do a search in the first place, if they exist in private groups on something like Facebook - they are useless to you and useless to anyone but the members of that private group. We are losing our giant public knowledge base because capitalism.

[–] [email protected] 261 points 10 months ago (13 children)

You really need to add Discord to this list as it is soaking up gigantic amounts of information about video games as a forum replacement. One could argue for actual community games like MMO's it is perhaps slightly different, but for the majority it is a huge problem.

[–] [email protected] 110 points 10 months ago (3 children)

In 10 years, when we move off discord for "the next big thing" all that info will be gone yet again. It happened to slack and it will most likely happen to discord. None of it will be indexed too. Fun times.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 99 points 10 months ago (10 children)

Reddit keeps asking me to use their app and they are very clearly making the mobile browser version worse and worse.
Just last week I couldn't view a thread I found on Google without signing in. It wasn't adult content and didn't require verifying my age. The reason given was very vague and had something to do with the content not being vetted (despite being old).

The Reddit garden wall is already here and is currently being rolled out. For your own good, of course.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I use a browser extension to redirect to old reddit, which doesn't have all this crap yet

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 175 points 10 months ago (4 children)

You can’t just write an essay like that and not tell us what terms you used for your searches

[–] [email protected] 69 points 10 months ago (1 children)

OP: "that movie, with the director"

Google: "... here's all the movies?"

OP: "noooooo"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 151 points 10 months ago (29 children)

The signal to noise ratio has seemed particularly out of wack with Google lately. The amount of blog spam SEO nonsense that crops up into the top 4 results has been pretty noticeable.

I’m not sure it’s entirely a Google thing. Reddit’s decline has made it harder to find quick answers for, “My washing machine’s making this weird string of beeps?” Niche hobbies moving from forums to Discord chats means, “How do I safely remove a keycap without damaging the switch?” is becoming a pinned message in a server you have to hear about via word of mouth. Basically any technology troubleshooting topic has moved from a blog post / forum to a YouTube video. And a 10 minute long one at that. Gotta hit those higher ad tiers.

For what it’s worth, I’m starting the new year off giving Kagi a try. It’s a startup trying to make a paid search engine work. You get 100 free searches to give it a try. After that it’s $5/mo for 300 searches, or $10/mo for unlimited. I’m not sure I’ll sign up for it just yet, but it seems pretty nice. No ads, custom components for things like Stack Overflow and Reddit, and some other nice touches for people who care about search. Their image search actually has a “View Image” link in addition to the “View Page” link. It’s hard to quantify how “good” a search result is, but I’ve been pretty impressed with it so far.

[–] [email protected] 131 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (10 children)

The last part of your comment sounds like an ad straight out of those overlong YT videos.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Have Brands™ started astroturfing Lemmy yet?

I’m not completely sold on Kagi yet. I’m still in the trial period right now. But paid services can be a tough sell online. I figured I’d be up front about the costs rather than wait for the inevitable “$10 a month for search!?” comment.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 10 months ago

I haven’t seen any obvious astroturfing yet, but your last paragraph really did have the vibe of a smoothly transitioned paid promotion. Not saying it was, but even the comments that you haven’t fully bought into it made it feel even more like one of the more honest paid promotions.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 10 months ago

Kagi is very good and I'm happy to be paying for it, but you were right in your second paragraph. It's not all google. Signal to noise in the web has gone way off. We need to throw out this Internet, it's gone bad

[–] [email protected] 26 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

It's a machine learning epidemic. Now that blogspam can be automated in a way that Google can't even look for without penalizing a ton of sites because people write in a similar style to ML tools, search is basically fucked in its current form. Back to human hand curated webrings.

Also Kagi sucks worse than Google and DDG for a lot of things. I still pay for it, hoping it gets better, plus they have a lot of useful tools.

Yandex.com is where you'll find movies.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
[–] [email protected] 92 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I'm really surprised that you couldn't find a Hollywood movie in an hour. Can I ask what the movie was? Was there a specific question you couldn't find the answer for?

[–] [email protected] 74 points 10 months ago (7 children)

I’ve always had the opposite, that a movie having a certain title absolutely destroys that term or phrase’s use unless all you want is that movie.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I understand OP's sentiment that google's getting worse, but this sounds like ragebait. No examples of what they searched for an hour.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 76 points 10 months ago (17 children)

I've finally switched to DuckDuckGo because of this. Even though only about two months ago I said here somewhere that it's garbage. Google just managed to convince me that they're more garbage.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's because DDG gets its results from Bing.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 65 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

What happened is SEO got good and money got made and fortunes got made and greed has taken over.

The internet today is the equivalent of the first and last 10 pages of the old yellowbooks. Why do you think AAA Auto is called what it's called?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 61 points 10 months ago (10 children)

Google was really valuable before web services were so monopolized and consolidated like they are now. It's almost more useful to use the specific websites search function for many things now. Before this, you could run searches and it would have all these personal and small websites indexed. Oh look, here's a guy who lives his whole life as Peter Pan and has a website about it, cool... now it's just a profile on some social media site same as anyone else.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 10 months ago (4 children)

It’s almost more useful to use the specific websites search function for many things now

Except Amazon's search of their own store has been so enshittified that it's normally better to search for a product on Amazon using Google.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 10 months ago (7 children)

I refuse to believe you haven't been able to find a Hollywood movie after an hour? That sounds more like an issue with you than Google

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I was trying to Google "Best way to shave your head with low or no water pressure" because I was staying somewhere rural for a bit and my razor kept clogging.

All I got were straight razor blog spam and dozens of other completely unrelated shit.

I tried the shake it in a bowl method, 1/10 razor still clogged with hair.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 10 months ago (11 children)

I get specifically pissed at all the AI generated answers.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 10 months ago (7 children)

The biggest issue I have is that half my results come back as videos. Video results should be in the video tab. I don't want to watch a half hour long video just to find out how to make a healing brew in ark.
One paragraph would convey the information 10x faster than any video could

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 10 months ago (4 children)

While it's fun to bash on Google, this might have been a more productive discussion if you had provided your search query and perhaps a sample of the results

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 10 months ago (8 children)

I just registered an account here specifically because I've noticed it a ton recently and I wanted to reply to this since it's been on my mind. From my experience, google's quality has been going down in general for a while now, but very recently (the last few months or so?) it hasn't been just unusable in a figurative sense, it's been quite completely literally useless to the point of basically being broken.

I really wish I could remember some specific examples of what I was searching for, but I've had more than one experience where it felt like if it couldn't find something on reddit or wikipedia (which I usually have to give it some assistance anyway with the site: filter), it was like that thing just didn't exist. It was just pages and pages of what looked like fake AI generated articles that were only maybe slightly adjacent to the topic I was searching for. If it happens again or I can remember a specific case I might try to update my response.

Disclaimer: I use bing 50% of the time depending on which browser profile I have open. No real specific reason here, just that I didn't bother updating the search engine settings on all profiles. Ironically, bing, which I had always regarded as inferior, does manage to give better results in some cases, but even still I feel like the quality has (somehow?) managed to go down as well.

Lately I've been trying to use mojeek, which (to my understanding) unlike other sites like DDG actually has its own crawler whereas most alternatives are just frontends for google/bing. The results are kind of wonky a lot of the time, but at least it's not so much fake unrelated garbage.

I do have an adblocker on all the time. Perhaps that's related. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised that my experience is so shitty given that I'm clearly not their target audience, if we're just talking about advertising.

Just this morning I noticed that ChatGPT (which I usually hate using) was giving me better results than google. Not just in a little way, the experience was about 100x better. Theory: they're trashing their search engine product to try to force people onto their "AI" products. Probably not that far-fetched. If they really want to push one product over the other you can either make one product a lot better than the other or make the other product a lot worse.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (8 children)

Google search failed to even find a hollywood movie, even after 1 hour of attempts.

That's just not believable. What was your search criteria?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

willing to bet google is garbage now because of all the AI-run “blogs” that post unhelpful idiotic filler “articles” on every topic under the sun

edit: i despise this shit so much that i made this dissection of a bullshit AI article: https://i.imgur.com/Hr1wffj.png

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 10 months ago (21 children)

It got so bad, I mainly use duckduckgo (95%) as of about two months ago

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I've heard the theory that it's LLM-generated spam content ruining the remaining results. There's presumably just so many webpages with heaps of garbage text now, that search engines need to aggressively filter anything that looks remotely like spam, including lots of legitimate content.

I do find it kind of terrifying, too. It's happened a few times now that I remember some event from a year ago or so, sometimes even being relatively certain what the title of an article was, and I just can't find anything about it. As if it had never happened.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 10 months ago (6 children)

This is why

The long and short of it - Google search was designed at a time when the web was in its infancy. Basically just text and a few images.

Fast forward to today, and reddit is the only one that still allows its data to be crawled.

As media has become more social (basically all of it) the walled gardens prevent you from even viewing content without an account.

Every platform wants you to be searching inside their service.

Google is useless.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 10 months ago (22 children)

Google search failed to even find a hollywood movie

Do you understand what a difficult problem this is though? You're searching for a movie without knowing the title, the release year, the studio, the actors, or anything else.

The medium you actually want to search is the entire back catalogue of Hollywood movies. And, we're talking the movies themselves -- not text, but motion pictures, audio and video. Finding a way to search audio-visual content is extremely challenging because you effectively need a computer to "watch" the movie and understand it.

Failing that, a second-best way to accomplish what you want is to search the movie scripts that were used to film the movie. That's a much easier problem in that they're text. But, it's a hard problem because the movies, the scripts, etc. are all owned by Hollywood studios who are notoriously against any new technology they don't control, that changes the paradigm in any way, etc.

If that isn't possible, the only remaining way of doing this task is to search through the web for commentary about the movie. For a big movie that made millions and has tons of reviews you might have some luck, because there might be a body of text that reflects what happens in the movie. You're basically relying on reviewers / discussions translating the audio-visual medium of the film into text that the search engine can find and index. But, you need enough discussions of the movie to make that possible.

A user here actually recognized your description of the plot and identified the movie as "John Dies at the End". Again, without relying on someone who has seen the movie, can you imagine how hard this would be for a search engine to do? It would have to watch and listen to something in an audio-visual medium, and understand what it saw enough to form a plot summary. Instead, you were lucky enough to come across a human who had seen and remembered the movie.

But, the movie you were searching for shows why it was so hard to find. This is a 2012 movie that grossed $141,951 according to IMDB, with an opening weekend of $12,467. This movie made $0.1 million, meaning almost nobody saw it. If you had known that Paul Giamatti and Clancy Brown were in it, you probably could have found it relatively quickly by searching their IMDB pages. But, as an aside, it's pretty amazing they did a movie that was made on such a tiny budget. Normally just getting one actor like that would blow through hundreds of thousands.

Anyhow, I think what has happened is that SEO has become better, walled gardens have blocked off Google from indexing huge areas of the web, and, most importantly, people's expectations have become much higher. Back when John Dies at the End was released, nobody would have expected to be able to find a movie based on searching for a vague description of the plot, unless they were using the exact right keywords and expected to find reviews using those keywords.

The kinds of things major search engines can do today are frankly like magic. You can search for a vague description like "actress who was in the movie with the blue people", and holy shit, of the text links, Avatar's Wikipedia page is the first one, and Zoe Saldaña's is the second. I mean, just stop for a second and think about how amazing that is.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 10 months ago (3 children)

duckduckgo has been working well imo

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's on purpose.

You spend longer IN Google, so you see more Google ads, on a Google platform, so Google gets a bigger cut of the pie.

It's the same reason Google started summarizing Wikipedia (or other highly rated results) on its search results where possible. Why they built basic functionality (timers etc) into their search engine.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 10 months ago

This is what capitalism does. A constant battle of finding the lowest quality to price ratio. Everything will naturally gravitate to the shitiest cheapest version of itself.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Google still works in languages other than English, like my workaround has been to just search in Estonian and I'll usually actually get better results and like zero AI content (AI sucks at Estonian, can't even get grammar right). So if you wanna use Google learn an obscure language.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 10 months ago (10 children)

I would be very interested to know exactly what you were searching for.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I have noticed this. I have a few searches that I do regularly, and over time I've watched the results get less and less relevant for the same keywords.

One of the more recent searches was for a set of data I had been building. I had the keywords from my notes, and when I went to search for it again, using the same keywords that found it the previous times, it was no longer a result. I knew the dates of one event in particular, so I narrowed to that, and still google served me results for ten years before the specified date range. A bit more fine tuning, and Google continued to serve the same results, all not even remotely close to what I was after, and results that were found even as recently as last week are not longer there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 10 months ago (9 children)

"We need better training data for our AIs. Let's introduce some random scramble into search results, and when users have to hunt through the list and pick what they actually wanted instead of the top result, we can use those data to train the AI how to respond to those words when they come up in AI prompts."

-- a Google exec, probably?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Google’s search results have definitely declined in recent years. It’s why I’ve mostly been using Perplexity for searching now.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Google has been useless since they started "customising" search results for individual users/browsers. That was what, ten years ago?

If they've found a way to make their web search even worse, I have to applaud them for winning the race to the bottom.

Are there search engines that still work?

Qwant, Mojeek, Startpage, Ecosia. You could look for trustworthy SearchX instances too. Even Duckduckgo is better than Google (meaning better than nothing).

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I hear a lot of people complaining about how they can't find stuff with Google, but it seems to work fine for me? i don't know what I'm doing differently

I use brave as well, but in my opinion Google searches work better for me? I guess I'm just more used to it or something, for some reason I find things quicker on Google and also I often rely on the search bar calculator with chrome which doesn't work as well on brave (since in order to get my answer, I have to press enter after entering in an expression. not sure if there's a way to change this)

edit note: I mostly use search engines to look up random information or for programming

[–] [email protected] 35 points 10 months ago (10 children)

An example of search engines failing me miserably last month:

I wanted to hire a photographer, so I started searching using keywords like "wedding photographer MAJOR_CITY_NAME", "photography MCN", "event photographer MCN", etc. The top results I got were all mostly along the lines of "top ten wedding photographers in MCN" i.e. listicles with links to a few photographers who probably paid the listicle creator? There were maybe one or two links to a photographer's website itself in the first page.

I'm okay with ignoring the first page of results and moving on to following pages. But rather than giving me individual photographer's websites in subsequent pages, I started getting listicles for "top ten wedding photographers in OTHER_CITIES". I'd click through multiple pages of results to find maybe 5 direct website links.

What actually helped me find a photographers eventually was entering the exact same key words on Instagram. Almost every single one of them that I found on Instagram had an excellent website and the city name, and their addresses were mentioned clearly on their websites. So, it wasn't a case of them not having enough information on their website. It's just that search engines chose to prioritise listcles of photographers from other cities rather than giving me links to individual websites of photographers in my own city.

In this case, I got lucky because photographers have a presence on Instagram which has a functional search engine. What if I want to find a plumber, or someone else? I'm forced to just trust a listicle creator because search engines don't want to give away links to single purpose websites and only want to keep us on websites with a shit ton of content (that may or may not be what you need) and ads.

/rant

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago (3 children)

No, can't say I had issues like that.

And I will say that while I think Google Search has become poisoned by fake/AI results, it's actually marginally better on Google than on something like DDG. It feels like all major search engine scraper developers just gave up on hte cat-and-mouse of blocking shit content and slowly it's all succumbing to endless SEO bullshit. 1995 Altavista all over again ;_;

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›