Has google stopped working for finding anything?

sighofannoyance@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world – 604 points –

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?

258

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

OP: "that movie, with the director"

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

OP: "noooooo"

Absolutely, at the very least what fucking movie

I mean, they probably used quite a few permutations, if they really did try for anything close to an hour...

I tried " movie woman assassin cold war" and one of the first results was "Atomic Blonde", which is what I was trying to get at. I then searched "movie two guys solve a murder comedy", the first link was some IMDb list about comedy/murder films that also had a bunch of buddy cups cop films on it and number 19 on that list was "The Nice Guys", which is what I was getting at. I would really want to know what this guy searched for because I refuse to believe he spent an hour searching and didn't find it. I don't remember the last time that happened to me honestly. Even the two times I tried just now were pretty generic (especially the second one) and yet I found them quickly.

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

OP was trying to find the movie with only a description of the plot. Google has definitely been thoroughly enshitified but, this one is largely on OP for trying to find a relatively obscure movie without any details.

That kind of thing used to reliably work for me, so it's not ludicrous that they'd expect it to stop work.

"Oh what's that movie where the guy does the thing" has never been a strength of search engines. It's why r/tipofmytongue is/was a thing.

But still I used to get results in about half of attempts, and now It's more like one out of five

Yea, google has gotten worse, but not THAT bad.

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

It's wild that in the few instances where the generative AI feature would actually work quite well (summarizing lists of distinct instructions), it often pushes long-form video instead.

I fucking despise video results.

But most of them are from YouTube, which surprise surprise, is owned by Google! So they don't give a damn, it's promoting their products in spite of the wishes of their consumers.

But then how would they RETAIN YOUR ATTENTION?

Don't forget to COMMIT WAR CRIMES AGAINST the bell and IRREPARABLY VIOLATE that like button!

This is such a great sentence I hereby like and subscribe to your comments.

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

this is not how google works (nowadays)

Did you maybe misunderstand what the commenter was asking for? We kind of need to know the search parameters and results before anyone could actually tell OP where they went wrong. Search engines are still search engines, even if you have to scroll through 6 ads to get to the results

Google does not display the same results for the same queries among different users, they display highly personalized stuff. Web search sadly has become almost unusable when you opt for anonymized use of the internet

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.

unlike other sites like DDG actually has its own crawler whereas most alternatives are just frontends for google/bing

Just so you know, DDG does have its own webcrawler (DuckDuckBot). It takes results from that, and the Bing API, and other sources, to generate results.

Also, they pay Bing for results from the Bing API (which as I understand it gives configurable access to the Bing index) and so even the results that do come out of Bing are quite different than you'd get compared to just a "frontend for Bing".

Check out Kagi!

Seen it recommended quite a few times in other comments here as well, will definitely take a look!

Yeah, with chatgpt you can search for "thing that was link thing but not like other thing and I think it had these traits" and if it's not extremely obscure it can find it for you.

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.

This is correct, there aren't many, and we recently passed 7.7bn pages. You can actually help with any wonkyness through feedback, but also we have this page which we trial new algos on; there's a large update sat on it currently.

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

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?

I've had this happen more often recently. An hour, or multiple hours, isn't unexpected anymore with search engines (not just Google, but Google is the worst offender).

It's incredibly frustrating.

My job & hobbies involves research 20-30 hours a week, over the last 15+ years. It's been a gradual decline in quality and usability since 2016 or so. I started complaining about it on forums and reddit, and not many people noticed, or thought the same. Only in the last 5 years or so have I seen others take notice, and even make articles about it.

It's a real thing, and those of us that do a lot of research for real information that isn't just today's news feel it first.

Search engines like Kagi are a light at the end of the tunnel, they tends to actually work.

An hour, or multiple hours, isn’t unexpected anymore with search engines

I'm not debating that search engines are not as good today as they were in the past, but I got to push back hard against the OP, as well as yourself, as far as the temporal measurement in hours, for trying to do a single search.

That's just not believable. You and the op have to give some real world examples of that.

They'd tell you what the movie was, but they'd have to search for it and don't want to waste an hour.

Jokes aside, I believe them, I spent close to an hour recently finding a YouTube I knew existed but I could only remember vague details. Ended up having crawl back months though my YouTube history in the end.

It used to be that you could just describe a movie to Google like "movie where " and it would be really good at finding that movie even if it was some obscure one. Now if you're trying to find that one movie you saw years ago where you just remember one scene, be prepared to spend that hour.

I don't believe them. And I don't believe that it's to save us an hour, but because it's hyperbolic

Yeah come on OP let us test what you're saying.

1 more...

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

I don’t get why everyone espouses ddg but shits on bing when bing is the underlying source.

Because you're in a bubble of "big corporations bad". Not uncommon on the fediverse for obvious reasons.

I don’t really subscribe to that mentality personally. Some are and some are not. Just like people.

That explains why my DDG searches have been less than helpful... it's just as unhelpful as Bing. I usually find myself trying other search engines, but run back to Google when I can't find anything relevant to the problem I'm trying to solve (most of my googling is tech help stuff).

Exactly.

As much as I’ve seen threads here on lemmy complaining about how terrible Google search is, Bing isn’t any better.

DDG is hit and miss for me, its my main SE but if i dont get results i want i switch to google. I have actually searched a website with almost the exact URL (when i wasnt sure about the end of the address) and it gave me zero results for that site, so it definately has its shortcomings.

And bing is fantastic, for video search... Porn.

I've been using SearXNG over Duckduckgo lately. It's a free (as in freedom) aggregator that searches all the engines. It's not perfect but you know 100% you are not being tracked.

The results are closer to a true old school search of the web. Sometimes it works better, sometimes not as well. It's best to pick a local instance that has quicker speeds since the main site can be a bit slower than local ones.

This distributed web stuff is really taking off. I like it!

After hearing it for a decade plus I still don’t know what “free as in freedom/free is in beer” actually means

Free beer, like you get a free beer at a party or event, it's no cost. Free software that costs nothing but is closed source.

Free as in freedom means the user has full access to the source code and is not subject to unknown code like in proprietary software.

Freedom as RMS sees it: https://lemmy.world/post/8134208

I always get confused by this analogy because my mind goes to beer representing open source (the ingredients aren't secret, and you can brew it yourself if you want to). "Free Coca-cola" would work better, like you're not paying for it right now but only one company knows how to make it.

The phrase is "free as in SPEECH/beer", because it doesn't make sense to say "freedom" - especially since that has all sorts of other connotations, especially in the USA. Everyone should be able to understand that free speech doesn't mean a speech that you listen to at no cost to yourself. It means the ability to express yourself without censure. And beer... everyone understands that, and who doesn't love free beer?

It's open source. The line comes from the early days when people were still arguing over definitions and free vs. open source and GPL vs. BSD, when the concept was new enough to the general public so that they would confuse "free software" for "freeware": Closed-source software that doesn't cost any money. By now all that has died down (unless you're the FSF) and the acronym "FLOSS" was invented, which sidesteps the double meaning of "free" by adding on "libre". Really they should've gone for GLOSS: Gratis, libre, open, source software. If you have a choice in marketing between shiny and dentist, always go for shiny.

(And for the nitpickers yes searxng is AGPL which makes it libre, not just open).

Oh, and speaking of, haven't looked at it in a long while, there's yacy, a peer to peer search engine.

Free as in freedom means it doesn't infringe on privacy (or any other rights) and free as in beer means no financial cost.

It's the default on all my devices, works just fine.

Another vote for DDG. I honestly didn't realize Google had gone to shit, because I haven't used them for anything in the last 5 years (which is wild for me to think about, because I used to be a huge Google fanboy in the G+/Hangouts/Google Now/Nexus era).

It doesn't allow keywords to be excluded from what I have been able to figure out, and some other minor issues that sometimes makes google easier and quicker to use. Most of the time that is a non-issue however.

when i need to search google i add !g at the beginning

It's funny how when I jumped to DDG a few years back, I felt like I was sacrificing the quality of results for better privacy.

These days you get the best of both.

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.

this has gotta be the correct answer. it's impossible to find anything written by a human on search engines these days unless you specifically click a forum link

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.

What's upsetting to me is how many communities that have moved to discord and there's no centralized way to search for content in there. Black hole of ethereal content

And the Discord search is total garbage. There's no way (I know of, and I've tried to search for it) to search for the exact term. No parentheses, no plus signs or whatever. So you try to search one term, but the results come back full of terms that are similar but not the same.

It's not the crawling that is the issue. Facebook for example shows up just fine on search results, you just need an account to view the content on FB if it isn't public. User privacy settings also shield content. Google has actively and willingly destroyed its utility as a search engine by placing revenue sites/preferred results ahead of actual search results. What they want you to $ee comes first, and if social media like facebook isn't profitable to google, you don't get to see it. I did a quick search for "facebook car groups" and got a page full of them, so you absolutely can get those walled gardens in results.

Facebook shows up, but do any of the conversations with meaningful information show up in a search?

Unfortunately I think this will get worse over time as databases of text and video are extremely useful for LLM training, and locking them down makes sense if you look at them as an asset that can be licensed.

On a related note, internal search sites implemented is usually a horrible abomination unable to find anything remotely relevant to the search. Bonus points if it doesn't allow exact search in some cases or at all; even if you know the specific text you search for, you'll go through hell to find it

Edit: better wording for exact search

1 more...

duckduckgo has been working well imo

I use duckduckgo for personal use and google for work and I have noticed a significant quality drop in the results for both.

Likewise, something happened in the last 1-2m, couldn't find answers. But sometimes Google did.

After finding myself searching multiple times for one thing at DDG, decided to just go with Kagi.com

The main issue with DuckDuckGo, in my experience, is searching in languages other than English.

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.

What I've noticed with the summarizing is that it'll pull a quote that says something close to the search term. When in context of the article the quote is a rhetorical question and often goes on to say, "No, actually the opposite is true.". Of course the second part of the sentence is left out of the summary.

Wild shit!

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.

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

The film was "john dies in the end" and OP didnt knownthe title, they were searching for the movie using a description of what they could remember from the film.

This is something i would very likely do in chat gpt these days.

I used to be able to find songs on google just by remembering a few lyrics but now when I try to do that all I find is garbage unfortunately.

Try to hum the song to Google assistant. Chances are it'll get it right with just 3-5 seconds of humming. L2use the tools at your disposal tbh

3 more...
3 more...

I just read the movie plot (which seems to differ from the book) on wikipedia and searched in a non-logged-in google for "movie horror two friends dimensions drug dealer jamaican". First result is the wanted movie. What are people searching for that they get such bad results?

3 more...
5 more...

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.

Wonder how well Esperanto would work. 🤔 But if we came up with another "lingua franca of relevant searches" I feel like they'd just tune AI garbage to that "untapped spam market."

It would be an arms(tongues?) race but then hey, everybody would know like 16 languages so that'd be cool. Lol

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.

There was a time when Google was scary accurate. I once had a need to SSH into a Linux box from a Win 8.1 machine. No built-in SSH client. So I googled "putty." Looking for PuTTY, the telnet/ssh/whatever client for Windows. Every return was for the software. Nothing about silly putty, plumbers putty, etc. It knew what I meant.

It doesn't anymore. Now it wants to change the subject to something it wants to talk about.

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).

Kagi is pretty good as well.

It's paid though, but if you are doing research a lot, definitely worth it.

My chief complaint would be the intrusion of Google in Android which makes it difficult to do web searches with another provider from the usual widget.

I've seen a lot of praise for Kagi, and perhaps one day I will pay for web search. I haven't succumbed yet though.

I haven't had any issues using non-Google search providers on Android, I use Firefox {or rather, Fennec) as a browser where I can set the default search engine; and FF comes with its own search widget that uses the same default setting.

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

Thats another ai driven search engine. Why won't it be enshittified soon as well?

I definitely can’t say that it won’t. It’s just what works best for me now until that does happen or a better solution comes along.

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 ;_;

1995 Altavista all over again

It has been solved then by web rings, web indexes and web directories ran by humans for other humans.

The issue is that such a cure is not acceptable for Google, FB etc.

Yeah and then their usual reply is "With how big we are, there's no way we could hire enough moderators!", which I agree with. They're too big. Cut'em up!

Well, I don't want to cut them up really, just leave them be with bots answering bots.

The problem is that people use them still. There is demand for features absent outside of their platforms.

I mean not other people being there - that's a point of pressure, but wouldn't be sufficient alone.

These features are (I'm describing the abstract thing):

  1. Search. People want relevant search or another way to quickly find a service, a place, a memo, a person etc without thinking.

  2. Applications. Various services allow you to easily find and install some casual game, for example.

  3. Forums and messaging.

  4. Common identification for all these.

  5. An RSS-like feed.

  6. Common interface for sharing posts, pictures and so on so that the source would be referenced in a uniform way.

  7. Likes and dislikes.

One can easily see these are partially things which were present and working in the good ole 2007 with XMPP (half of 3), openID (4), RSS (5), numerous web forums (another half of 3), Flash (yes, Flash, and also Java applets) (2). And back then (I was a kid, but) I can remember those being treated as future mainstream.

So the remaining parts which these companies filled and abused to monopolize the system are: 1, 6 and 7.

Search, common object space and rating.

Of course, now the other parts are not really present too.

What I'm coming at, to make it short - GNUNet could make a world of difference if it were really functional and not permanent alpha unclear how to run.

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.

A search engine does not have to watch a movie to know things about it, that's absurd and never how its worked

I didn't say that, read again.

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

I read it again and found that, where you say exactly what you said you didn't

You apparently lack reading comprehension. Try again.

I mean, I used to be able to ask Google "hey, what's that song that goes do do do do do do do" and it very often got it right. With just text, mind you; not the assistant and humming some bars. That seems like it should be just as hard as figuring out what movie I'm talking about with a plot description, which is usually summed up on IMDB or Wikipedia well enough that OP should not have had much issue finding it.

i am struggling to either parse or believe this. you have successfully gotten an answer to the search query "what's that song that goes do do do do do do do"?

Two more “do”s and I’d be certain you’re referring to the final countdown.

I used to be able to ask Google "hey, what's that song that goes do do do do do do do" and it very often got it right

You just got me trying to find that one song I heard in an indie disco 11 years ago that goes like "candy canes and apples" again... and again I failed.

If it's so difficult, then why was Google able to find the answer to questions exactly like this 6+ years ago?

That was why everyone switched to Google. The search engine just worked.

And frankly a large portion of your post is just incorrect. What you've described is how a very bad programmer would build a search engine. It's overly complicated and requires too much data.

why was Google able to find the answer to questions exactly like this 6+ years ago?

curious if there is any way to know for sure if this is the case? is there documentation of vague google searches over time to track their results? sort of seems like a "don't know what you got til it's gone" sort of thing for the average user. but maybe there is some academic work or industry publications to this effect?

We do have a good 10-20 years of every news story intro containing a line like "a google search for 'spatula' returns 2.5million results". remember when journalists and other writers thought that just putting a single search term into a search engine was the way to conduct online research?

otherwise it is really just your recollection how it felt then vs now. i can't comment on @merc@sh.itjust.works's programing skills but the point about changing expectations is a good one. not to mention that the amount of available data has exploded.

I doubt there's any way to tell. Google probably has "search quality" phrases that they plug into it to track their quality over time, but those are probably secret, and most of them are probably not vague searches that you wouldn't expect to work.

I really doubt Google was able to do this 6+ years ago. From what I remember, 6+ years ago, we were still trying to use specific words or phrases we expected to see on the page we wanted to find, or at least phrases we expected to see on pages that linked to the page we wanted to see.

Exactly, this is some of the weirdest gushing i ever seen for a product that is at the worse state it's been in decades.

This is why at work I just use Bing and edge, slightly better results, and you can say things like "I just binged that and now I am edging so hard right now" to your coworker

bing does NOT have slightly better results

I love how readily people are to say shit like "bad programmer". I bet most the time the person saying it is either not even a "programmer" or is so average they feel the need to belittle others.

Who even uses the word "programmer" to describe a contemporary software engineer anyway? I don't think that job really exists anymore.

Agree, assumption that this movie should be found based on OP's provided description is a bit ridiculous, it all depends on keywords and how unique they are and popularity on medium. Read the summary of this book and found the book later with query "magician monster dimension book movie adaptation". Keyword magician most likely helped here.

Tried to find Equilibrium with "movie with guns karate" and it was mentioned in first page as well.

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

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

Disclaimer: I'm late to this whole discussion and I also don't understand some things (I don't fully understand what SEO is and why it's bad, though from the comments I understand it's part of what's making search engines worse nowadays)

Given that: I also made some searches where I wouldn't get anything good in the first pages, but that seemed to be dictated by the amount of spam sites too, isn't it?

I mean, I use the Ublock Origin and NoScript extensions for Firefox and search logged out of Google, so I don't get advertisements, but I agree that, depending on what I search, I need to fight through large amounts of crap to find something good. Still I don't understand (and it's my lack of knowledge in this) why it's the search engine's fault for not being the best and hiding spam sites

SEO itself is fine - it's just optimising your website website for whatever a search engine considers important.

The problem is that search engines' seem to have absolutely garbage metrics for what is important and worth it.

I’ve noticed for quite a while now that you can’t search by location like that, but have to use the keyword “near me”. When I do that, the first result is a map with on an and list of photographers.

Its not actually “near” but its in the area so that might be that I don’t share location

7 more...

I've not noticed any problems with Google myself but I just did the same search you did. It brought up Google maps at the top, quite helpful as it showed local photographers. But as I went down to the results the only one in my local area was the top result. The rest were things like photographers in Majorca, Peterborough, a random motorcycle website.

I've never noticed how broken Google is until now.

7 more...

I've been using DuckDuckGo for years now and it works surprisingly well for me. 9 times out of 10 I find exactly what I'm looking for in the first couple of results. Brave Search is another independent alternative you might look into.

AI generated garbage seems to be cluttering up places like Google.

Brave search is great, I changed over and haven't needed anything else since. There's no dedicated product search, which is a shame, but it does call out prices on the main search so it's still useful even for pretty niche products.

The first result is always an ad that is irrelevant or outright misleading, sometimes dangerous.

The second result is a plug for some stupid Google tie-in service like Shopping or Maps.

The third or fourth result is usually what I was after, if not I usually have to change my query.

Tried to switch to DDG a few years ago but it's index was a bit lacking for my day job, may try it again though as Google is getting increasingly frustrating to use. And just not a fan of their ecosystem.

Even searching for obscure items returns 10,000 hits, but only the same 5 sites repeated 2,000 times.

Compounded by sites like RSSing that frame or scrape other websites. Another hit, but literally the same thing verbatim as another.

Kagi.com for about a year now, absolutely love it. Never Google anymore.

been hearing praise for kagi for ages in underground communities like this and admire what they're trying to do with the orion browser (although that one is still too buggy for me to use daily), gonna give it a shot now. cheers

5 more...

no and it's ALL googles fault. It's not a walled garden problem, It's a google problem. I'm searching for specific items to buy and look for small shops with online presences. Google will NOT give me results for shops that don't advertise with them. I can even type the name of the shop into the search. Sometimes Bing, sometimes duck duck go will give the results.

I can have the site open in one window and use another to type the description of an item I am looking at AND the name of the site I am searching on google and it's like 'Nope' never heard of them. i have to type the url in to the search bar then it will return a link.

Now sponsored links pop up a plenty.

We are the product being sold to advertisers. Search is working as intended.

2 more...

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.

I came to the exact same decision a few months ago.

DDG used to be worse; now it’s better.

So you're using Bing.

It may be bing under the hood, but it gives simple results without having ads and giant boxes everywhere.

It's been getting worse and worse for me too. Even things that I used to Google that would just come up so I could find it aren't anymore.

The YouTube search must have had an update because now it's entirely fucking worthless too even for searching only within itself. It'll show two relevant results and the rest just garbage.

Duckduckgo.com is my go to solution for when Google wants to give me trash results.

yeah no. i am WILLING duckduckgo to work as a search engine, but the results are so bad, it doesn't do phrases well. i just searched "blue sign construction", thinking i'd find infos about blue signs in construction sites. literally the whole first site is about "bluesign", something to do with textile production. and the picture results are 99% just construction signs in all different colours.

This. One of the reasons I couldn't use DDG for more than a week, and I still kept using !g inbetween. Kagi is the way to go for me.

1 more...

I get the feeling this'll be an unpopular suggestion but I've used Ecosia for something like ten years and it's never failed me. I use Duckduckgo on my Linux laptop because it came bundled and it's still not worth changing.

Ecosia has been my standard for a long while now, not realky hear many people mentioning it either.

I've long felt like it gives me better results than Google too but I've never really tested that idea!

When using noscript I see bing in between and I think they make use of their API. But yeah I also have the idea that it works better.

1 more...

Sometimes I not only have the impression that good content is harder to find, but that there is less good content in general. This may have something to do with the fact that high-quality content is becoming increasingly uneconomical. Plagiarized or low effort content is much cheaper. With the rise of AI, I think this trend will only continue to intensify.

I hate Google now, I was a loyal Android user since the very first Nexus and a Google account user since day 1 of Google+ (I miss you Google+), I even bought a Pixel 2 XL as soon as it came out...

I don't like Google or apple anymore. Granted apples walled garden approach was never appealing to me. But google antics lately have just sucked the joy out of things. It's like they're trying to hinder me at every turn. Just give me a phone with an operating system that I can control, with all the apps I need. Why has that become so hard. Android is good because it has all the apps. But Google's been trying to lock it down tighter than a ticks ass since they introduced safetynet.

I also have a Pixel 2 XL! (Because I got it refurbed for $50...) But either way hi phone buddy!

Yeah bruh, Google has been shit for a good long while, now.

Right. Like, I haven't used it since reddit started to charge for API calls.

Yeah I switched my primary search to DDG at about the same time. It just has more relevant reulsults, especially if you're just looking for reference to some random API or library.

Google will let you find what they want you to find. Especially if it's a commercial product of some sort.

Long time rant of mine that google has declined in worth as far as search goes. Cramming ads, videos with ads, and preferred search results now consumes the first page of results and more. If you're searching for a tech problem or a solution to some issue, it's somewhat better after you get past preferred sites and garbage SEO sites all trying to sell you something, but often it's best to use Site: search. You can't really use modifiers like "-" or quotes very much either, the "-" simply does not work at all, and getting too specific with quotes, more than a couple words, will often result in no search results at all.

I'm using Duckduckgo for a while now. Pretty good

DDG is great for privacy, but their results are mostly just Bing results. Which is usually fine, but rarely excellent.

It's a ruzzian company right?

I think they're french ?!

Perplexity AI says: "Answer No, DuckDuckGo is not a Russian company. It is an American software company based in Paoli, Pennsylvania, United States. It was founded by Gabriel Weinberg and offers a private search engine and other privacy-oriented software products. "

Well, in that case, fuch google, I'm out.

1 more...

Just today I was searching for a news article about a local radio personality who got fired in the last few days. Zero relevant results. Just extraneous garbage. I was stunned.

I seem to find what I need. DDG is my default search and I still end up switching over to google more than half the time to get what I'm looking for.

Do I wish Google wasn't annoying and greedy? Yes. I don't think any corporation owes me that specifically though. But we do owe it to each other to bring attention to it and even reduce demand for it when possible.

They don't owe me anything, no. But I don't owe them anything either. If they aren't serving my needs anymore (and they often aren't), I'll be taking my "business" (that is, my product) elsewhere.

I share the same sentiment, but the problem is finding a better "elsewhere".

Google search used to be so far beyond the capabilities of all other search engines, but lately it's been closing that gap from the top down. Even in its enshittified state, it still outperforms the other search engines out there more consistently, albeit just barely.

That's my experience anyway, I would love to be introduced to something better if anyone happens to have suggestions!

For a year or two that answer has been "Google, but append site:reddit.com" to the end. Now, who knows. We should go back to webrings.

It's unfortunate how often it is that the best solution is to combine the powers of 2 sites that have been (not so) recently dipping their toes into the "detestable corporations" side of things.

I'm late to the party and I don't understand several things I read in the comments, so I need to ask for clarification.

What is Google's Search Engine Optimization (SEO)? I looked it up, but the websites StartPage was giving me were not useful (probably ads or spam sites). Is finding these ads/spam sites the problem?

How is this a search engine's fault? I mean, if the internet is now made by walled gardens and spam sites, search engines have trouble finding something really relevant, but how is it their fault?

I should add I navigate logged out on Firefox with the Ublock Origin and NoScript extensions (among others) so I at least don't see Google's ads.

I agree there are some searches where it's next to impossible to find informed sites from spam ones: just a week ago I was looking for "Best Nintendo Switch games released in 2023" and I got lots of dubious blogs, and even when I got hits from IGN, GameSpot or PcMag sites, I realized I don't know if any of these last sites are genuine or bought out (and checked the Wikipedia for more wisdom about their veracity), but how is it the search engine's fault to not navigate through seas of crap?

When I search for academic things, Google or StartPage still seem to give me useful answers.

I have been wary about searches related to reviews about anything, but it just seemed to me the internet is a worse place now in general (because of walled gardens and spam)

The search engine makes the rules for what they deem important in finding the correct results. SEO is the practice of optimising of a web site to best get your site on the top of the list. All the painful stories about grandmothers and long lost lovers at the top of recipes are to achieve better SEO and a good example of how SEO made the internet worse.

Thanks! So it's some sort of guidelines Google and other search engines laid out which can be exploited to maximize visibility. Very annoying indeed

Discovering new search machines would be an alternative. But they all have their filters and algorithms which make it hard to find exactly what you want. In the long run the internet will be run by AI serving copyright cowbows and big governance.

I can give a fun example for both ddg and Google:

Earlier today I was writing an exam paper for my students, and one of the topics is "basic" normal distribution. So, I thought to myself, why not make it I testing, give them a real world normal model.

Try it yourselves - the number of bot reposts is frightening.

Maybe I'm stupid but it's not clear what specifically to try...

Honest question: what you've described is very disturbing (having to wade through lots of bot reposts), but why would this be Google's fault (or DuckDuckGo's or Bing's or StartPage"s or Kagi's)?

I'm not trying to save the search engines since they're also out to make a profit, but if half the internet is spam, why would this be a search engine's fault? I mean, we can complain it's not sophisticated enough to navigate through the crap

Fixed: added second paragraph

On the contrary, that is their function, one they used to be good at.

Who cares whose fault it is?

Finding out the cause of something is typically a good pathway to fixing the problem.

What am I supposed to be looking for that I can't find on Google? I have no idea what basic normal distribution is but it seems google is providing plenty of useful results about it.

It gives normal distribution questions, but not actual use cases (I was looking for a normal model based on actual data rather than just made up values).

You're looking for normal distributions in chemistry, biology and real estate.

Well since you can't change how google works you have to just either deal with it or change search engines.

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.

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.

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.

Where are the data hoarders when you need them?

Tools for backing up servers already exist: https://github.com/Tyrrrz/DiscordChatExporter But unfortunately discord can't be easily scraped in one coordinated attempt unlike reddit due to the massive number of private servers and existing verification/anti-bot mechanisms. As a result, only the communities that have data hoarders will be actually archived.

But u can login to discord and if the room is public you can see the content. Even if ur logged into FB if ur not in the private group u can't see the content.

I think the point is you can't put a search term into a search engine and get results from some random Discord. No body is going to go trawling through Discords to then use the search function to potentially find information from it. Now, if chats were somehow archived and could then be searchable, different story, but I don't think that's what people using Discord want from Discord.

yeah, this is a problem. But in practice i found that if your searching for one niche problem and your only lead is discord, the people there are going to be kind and help.

I know the pain on having to join something's discord to get info, but it's usually fast after I join.

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.

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

I use Bing AI for complex results and duck duck go mostly, I can't use Google search, it brings too much curated content that is different then the query

This is why the big search engines are throwing money at large language models. They hope AI-curated results is the next revolutionary advance.

Except llm written websites have made searching for things much harder turning a lot of sites into blog AI sludge

Kagi. DDG and Google are trash in comparison

Or Yandex for borderline legal content (e.g. movies, porn, etc.)

whats so good about yandex

I struggled finding reviews of Asgard's Wrath 1 on the Quest 2 headset. Google just assumes I want the newest game.

Struggled? I just searched "Asgards Wrath 1 review" and that's all it is, I had to scroll all the way down to see the "people also searched for" to even see Asgards Wrath 2

Was the review specifically for the Quest 2 headset?

Edir: Nevermind, seems it's a PCVR Exclusive Game so a review specifically for Quest 2 wouldn't make much sense.

I dunno if its the stuff I'm searching for or what but I'm just not running into this issue.

FWIW my last few searches were- "Malta", "war is a racket", and "russias egg crisis". None in quotes. The only one I had to poke around a bit for was the last and that was to change to the news tab. Maybe I just usually search for hard stuff to monetize? I dunno

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Even the CEO has acknowledged this. They serve you what makes THEM the most profits, not what YOU wanted, ever.

For years now, the only way to find something technical related was to add "Reddit" to the search. But then Reddit imploded as well, chasing profits over the needs of its customers.

And Twitter/X likewise is now chasing profits over the needs of its customers, causing many to flee.

As too is happening in so many other places, such as Stack overflow, and most of Hollywood itself was on strike for months, bc they have been chasing profits over the needs of its customers.

Managers think they know better than customers what you want, or at least what you are willing to put up with.

And now they are pushing AI to the rescue, to put even above the SEO results, but soon they'll have to think about actually monetizing those answers, and the cycle will repeat at the level of SEO'd AI answers.

DuckDuckGo works, for now. Maybe one day there will be a hostile takeover and it won't anymore.

Btw this phenomenon is called https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification of the internet - yes that's the official term afaik!!:-)

Is there any hope of this getting better? I rely on the internet for most of my knowledge so it sounds like I'm doomed.

Share your search history. It's impossible to know what advice to give you without knowing what you tried.

I've recently switched to Kagi and it has been an amazing experience so far. I definitely recommend that to anyone who can spare the 5-10$ a month. I like their business model, and the way I can customise results to I.e always ignore reddit posts, while still maintaining privacy because they are not in the ads business (yet?).

And the results are usually pretty on spot, while also avoiding the major ai/spam blog posts by default.

I don't know man. I've never had that problem before.
What movie were you searching for?

I use DuckDuckGo more and more often but that's actually just because they support more syntax than they used to.

Companies pay to be the top result in searches.

I have a short story that perfectly exemplifies the problems with Google and the Internet in general.

I dropped a melatonin gummy on the floor near my dog, and then I couldn't find it (he didn't eat it, it rolled under the couch). So I did what anyone would do, and googled "my dog ate melatonin".

The first result was an article that said "melatonin is perfectly safe for dogs to eat, no worries!". Whew! Coast is clear! I wiped the nervous sweat from my brow and felt my panic melt away...

But just as I was about to close Google, I see that the second result states clearly "melatonin is toxic for dogs, your dog is gonna die and it's your fault. Call the vet now!". (I exaggerate, but it definitely said toxic and to call emergency vet services). Panic resumes, sweat returns.

Dude.... What the fuck am I supposed to do in that situation? Both of the articles seemed like they were legit and yet had wildly different messages.

Thankfully I found the gummy a few minutes later and didn't end up at the emergency vet, but it was a confusing and concerning situation.

This doesn't even bring up the garbage AI generated content that is now 9 out of 10 top results from Google. If you don't want that shit, and want something written by a human being, you basically have to put "Reddit" in your query.... And I think I know how most of us here feel about Reddit...

i've got a subscription for ChatGPT and tend to use it over Google, unless I know Google has decent results.

Duckduckgo has gotten good enough that they're being more brave with ads: the first several results are always ads for me now, such that I usually have to scroll to get ito good results. I don't begrudge the ads; ddg doesn't track users, and ads are how they fund the service.

Lately, I've switched my default engine to a good searx instance. When I'm not looking for a business, it gives me better results. However, when I am loojing for products or services, DDG is better. DDG seems to prioritize commercial interests, either intentionally or not. I suspect it has something to do with SEO; maybe searx ignores a lot of that.

I also find that Bing is providing better results than Google, lately.

Finally, here's one of the best search engine resources I've come across recently:

Search Engine Party

Duck duck go IS Bing. So of course they're both getting better/worse at the same time. They're the same search engine.

"a Hollywood movie"

Wow that's so specific. What were you searching for? What were your parameters? You tried for an hour? Sounds like you don't know anything about the movie. If you don't know anything about it how can you expect a search engine to? It searches what you tell it, and it sounds like you didn't tell it anything helpful.

There are very good alternatives to Google nowadays actually. I haven't used Google in a long time. I've been jumping between brave search and startpage. Mostly brave search. Only thing Google has going for it is maps when searching for a business. Brave only shows the business in a basic form and show when they open and close for the day, whereas Google shows a lot more, including directions that open Google maps when clicked. They also show business hours for the whole week, reveiews...blah. other than that, I've been very happy with brave search and startpage

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.

I think what happened is that someone typed "google" into Google, and broke the internet.

Ad company serves ads over useful information, news at 11… don’t use Google

I keep hearing people complain about Google becoming unusable, but I never run into this issue. Anyone have specific examples of searches that should have worked in the past, but don't work now?

I don't use Google that often, but when I do, my search is specific enough to work. Some of my recent searches are "Skacket" (a specific Minecraft server plugin,) "Google Sheets newline in cell", "Sedecordle", and "Jeffrey Wright imdb".

I'd never have expected it to work for such questions as "movie with smart guy who stretches". Those kinds of questions are better suited for AIs like ChatGPT, in my opinion.

It's why I switched to DuckDuckGo. At least there I can find the result in a few pages. Google doesn't even respect operators anymore. Want to search for enterprise but don't want car ads? Good luck finding captain Picard through all that nonsense.

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.

Why would google even attempt to fix their search results? Just look at your own anecdote, you just spent an hour searching stuff on google, and perhaps saw an hour worth of ads in the search result. This counts as positive metrics on some exec's report about how search usage increase year after year.

If anything, a paid search engine like Kagi actually have reverse incentive that they want you to search as little as possible to reduce their server costs, and thus must be able to produce great search result so you won't spend more resource searching over and over again. Subscribing to Kagi is more useful than subscribing to youtube premium imo.

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?

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.

People trying to look up the Kirby character "Zero Two" to find fan creations based on it...

Only to get barraged with weeb garbage.

Seriously you used to easily find fan content, remixes and music. Now all you get are shitty AMVs of some turbovirgins "Waifu"

Google is great if you use Chrome and haven't disabled tracking settings in your google account and browser