One thing I have noticed is any search is more likely to pop up a news article with that word vs a good article on it. Look up say a band and I will get a lot of articles about some recent things they did vs the website for the band or an indepth look at the band. I really don’t need twenty versions of the same article from news networks all copying each other. It feels like it is favoring new stuff first and can’t see that it is repeating itself.
Seconded. Looking up a past event on a subject (like a band) that has had a more recent, especially “viral” event happen to it, is like wrestling a shaved bear.
Nevermind that all of the recent shit is just articles quoting eachother, adding virtually nothing of value except noise.
Then if do you click the link, the article has almost nothing to do with the title. No confirmations, no details, just random claims from someone who you’ve never heard of before.
One thing I have noticed is any search is more likely to pop up a news article with that word vs a good article on it. Look up say a band and I will get a lot of articles about some recent things they did vs the website for the band or an indepth look at the band. I really don’t need twenty versions of the same article from news networks all copying each other. It feels like it is favoring new stuff first and can’t see that it is repeating itself.
Duck duck go still works better.
Seconded. Looking up a past event on a subject (like a band) that has had a more recent, especially “viral” event happen to it, is like wrestling a shaved bear.
Nevermind that all of the recent shit is just articles quoting eachother, adding virtually nothing of value except noise.
Human: Hey Google can you tell me how this band got started and the significance of their first album?
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Human: oh that’s sad, I hope they get the help they need but about my questions–
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
Google: the lead singer was just admitted to rehab and you won’t believe what happens next!
This is actually a slight improvement
That’s more the type of prompt you would give a LLM, rather than a search engine. I’m not surprised that it results in garbage.
Then if do you click the link, the article has almost nothing to do with the title. No confirmations, no details, just random claims from someone who you’ve never heard of before.