• mctoasterson@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    3 months ago

    The annoying part is how many mainstream tech companies have ham-fisted AI into every crevice of every product. It isn’t necessary and I’m not convinced it results in a “better search result” for 90% of the crap people throw into Google. Basic indexed searches are fine for most use cases.

    • AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      As a buzzword or whatever this is leagues worse than “agile”, which I already loathed the overuse/integration of.

      • xthexder@l.sw0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Before AI it was IoT. Nobody asked for an Internet connected toaster or fridge…

        • Balder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I always felt like I was alone in this thinking. I think anyone with a bit of a security mindset don’t want everything connected, besides it makes them more expensive and easier to break. It’s certainly very convenient for programmed obsolescence.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            It definitely has to walk in the desert for a while. I know multiple people who like it for some stuff. Like cameras and managing air conditioning.

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      With adblock enabled I feel like their results are often better than for example Duckduckgo. I recently switched to using DDG as my standard search engine but I regularly find myself using Google instead to get the results I’m looking for.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Interesting, I’m actually the exact opposite. I always start with Google, because it’s usually good enough, but whenever it takes 2-3 tries to get something relevant, I switch to ddg and get it first try.

        • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          My issue is mostly with image search results. DDG’s images tend to be less relevant than Google’s. DDG also lacks “smart” results (idk the official term).

          For example when you search “rng 25” on Google, it will immediately present you with a random number between 1 and 25. On DDG you have to click on one of the search results and then use some website to generate the number.

          Or when searching for the results of a soccer game, Google will immediately present all the stats to you, while on DDG you will only find some articles about it.

          Of course it really depends on the kind of search and I’m sure DDG will regularly have better results than Google too.

          • Verat@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            One example I had with DDG image search was transparent electronics, I couldnt find a way to get electronics with a transparent case, DDG would only give me generic electronics images that had transparency. Google got it though

          • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Those kinds of things are what people often take issue with Google about. Well, the second one anyway. The first is arguably not a search and is instead a calculation, but I admit that’s a little semantical.

            The first however, is Google taking information provided by third parties, and presenting it to the user. It prevents traffic from flowing through to the original site, and is something actively complained about.

            • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              And I should care about that because? Google is sparing me from visiting a website that will harass me to accept cookies, complain about my adblocker, probably request to send notifications, etc.

              • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                The same reason we don’t let companies sell photocopies of books? This isn’t a take on piracy, to be clear. This is a take on one company stealing content from another, and serving it up as if it were their own. And when Google has a monopoly on search, that fucks over everyone but Google, including you.

                • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Extracting information from the internet that is freely available isn’t exactly stealing content. Haven’t you ever copied something from Wikipedia? Why would Wikipedia even exist if people can’t use and share its content?

  • lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    AI is just what crypto bros moved onto after people realized that was a scam. It’s immature technology that uses absurd amounts of energy for a solution in search of a problem, being pushed as the future, all for the prospect of making more money. Except this time it’s being backed by major corporations because it means fewer employees they have to pay.

    • pycorax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      There are legitimate uses of AI in certain fields like medical research and 3D reconstruction that aren’t just a scam. However, most of these are not consumer facing and the average person won’t really hear about them.

      It’s unfortunate that what you said is very true on the consumer side of things…

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      energy for a solution in search of a problem,

      Except this time it’s being backed by major corporations because it means fewer employees they have to pay.

      Ah yes the classic it is useless and here is a use for it logic.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I have and don’t see the relevance. The argument is that it is useless and then mentions a use case. If you want to say it’s crap I won’t argue the point but you can’t say X and ~X.

    • Halosheep@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I use generative ai sometimes, and I find it useful for certain usecases.

      Are you just following the in ternate hate bandwagon or do you really think it’s no good?

  • jj4211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    3 months ago

    The confounding part is that when I do get offered an “AI result”, it’s basically identical to the excerpt in the top “traditional search” result. It wasted a fair amount more time and energy to repeat what the top of the search said anyway. I’ve never seen the AI overview ever be more useful than the top snippet.

  • Facebones@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Its not even hidden, people just give zero fucks about how their magical rectangle works and get mad if you try to tell them.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    whats up with these shit ass titles? It’s not even REMOTELY hidden, it takes two fucking seconds of googling to figure this shit out.

    The entire AI industry was dependent on GPU hardware manufacturers, and nvidia is STILL back ordered (to my knowledge)

    This is like saying that crypto has a hidden energy cost.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      As long as we are talking about crypto, and I know this is shocking, turns out some people are using it for unsavory acts. It is okay if you want to sit down.

      • ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        There’s cocaine on literally every US Dollar and that currency is backed by oil, relatively speaking crypto is cleaner

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          I am against the drug war and I think the cocaine thing was an urban legend. Also the US dollar is not backed up by oil.

          • ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            The US Dollar is not only backed by oil, but also American banking imperialism.

            Im against the war on drugs too. But speaking of drugs, weed is schedule 1, where Xanax is schedule 4 (low risk of abuse). It’s completely upside down and not accurate. That said, the harmfulness of the substance and being for or against the war on drugs is completely separate from the fact that there’s cocaine on literally every single dollar bill. Money is the dirtiest thing in general, and by those metrics, the US Dollar is dirtier

      • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Some people? The vast majority of the crypto eco system is grifters and get-rich-quick rubes.

  • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    If only they did what DuckDuckGo did and made it so it only popped up in very specific circumstances, primarily only drawing from current summarized information from Wikipedia in addition to its existing context, and allowed the user to turn it off completely in one click of a setting toggle.

    I find it useful in DuckDuckGo because it’s out of the way, unobtrusive, and only pops up when necessary. I’ve tried using Google with its search AI enabled, and it was the most unusable search engine I’ve used in years.

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    To be fair, it was never “hidden” since all the top 5 decided that GPU was the way to go with this monetization.

    Guess who is waiting on the other side of this idiocy with a solution? AMD with cheap FPGA that will do all this work at 10x the speed and similar energy reduction. At a massive fraction of the cost and hassle for cloud providers.

  • repungnant_canary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m genuinely curious where their penny picking went? All of tech companies shove ads into our throats and steal our privacy justifying that by saying they operate at loss and need to increase income. But suddenly they can afford spending huge amounts on some shit that won’t give them any more income. How do they justify it then?

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s another untapped market they can monopolize. (Or just run at a loss because investors are happy with another imaginary pot of gold at the end of another rainbow.)

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Perception. If a company isn’t on the leading edge we don’t consider them the best.

      Regardless if you use them or not, if Google didn’t touch AI but Edge did you would believe edge is more advanced.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Because data is king and sessions are going to be worth a lot more than searches. Go through the following

      1. Talk to a LLM about what product to buy

      2. Search online for a product to buy

      Which one gives out more information about yourself?

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is terrible. Why don’t we build nuclear power plants, rollout a carbon tax, and put incentives for companies to make their own energy via renewables?

    You know the shit that we should have been doing before I was born.