TE
테크에코
홈24시간 인기최신베스트질문쇼채용
GitHubTwitter
홈

테크에코

Next.js로 구축된 기술 뉴스 플랫폼으로 글로벌 기술 뉴스와 토론을 제공합니다.

GitHubTwitter

홈

홈최신베스트질문쇼채용

리소스

HackerNews API원본 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 테크에코. 모든 권리 보유.

Google is burying the web alive

224 포인트작성자: doener3일 전

46 comments

nicbou3일 전
I can weigh in on this. I run a small information website (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;allaboutberlin.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;allaboutberlin.com</a>). My traffic has been growing steadily for 7 years, but now its down 30-ish percent year on year. From what I&#x27;m hearing, my competitors (and friends) are having it worse.<p>My main mission is to put new information on the internet. It&#x27;s harder to do this if AI destroys the economics of it. It&#x27;s also harder without an audience who provides feedback and encouragement. Having all information mediated by two companies isn&#x27;t just digging into my revenue, it&#x27;s killing the fun.<p>The unfortunate side effect is that it made me focus more on business and less on serving my readers. I&#x27;m working on health insurance stuff when I would rather work on a citizenship guide. It&#x27;s also sad to see all the nuance stripped from my carefully chosen words.<p>It sucks, honestly. I am being replaced by AI, but I am still supposed to go experience the real world and translate it into LLM training material. In the end, there still is a thinking, feeling human being doing the essential work. He&#x27;s just not getting paid anymore.
评论 #44100565 未加载
评论 #44101095 未加载
评论 #44102925 未加载
评论 #44100140 未加载
评论 #44099706 未加载
评论 #44099674 未加载
评论 #44100721 未加载
评论 #44104824 未加载
评论 #44102973 未加载
评论 #44102979 未加载
评论 #44100913 未加载
评论 #44105276 未加载
评论 #44104028 未加载
评论 #44105383 未加载
评论 #44104684 未加载
ninth_ant3일 전
Implicit in this article is the idea that you have to use Google, and that Google Search equals “the web”. I’ll be the boring nerd, I guess, who has to be the one to say there are many other search engines out there.<p>If you don’t like Google (I don’t), or don’t like where they are moving their products (I don’t) — please use a competing search engine.<p>I’ve used DuckDuckGo for years and I don’t miss anything about Google. There are plenty of other good search engines out there too.<p>It’s not particularly difficult to switch away and get an experience more to your liking, so it’s a bit baffling when Google Search product decisions are equated with burying the web alive. Just don’t use it!
评论 #44099349 未加载
评论 #44099307 未加载
评论 #44099577 未加载
评论 #44108755 未加载
评论 #44101543 未加载
评论 #44107869 未加载
评论 #44099460 未加载
评论 #44103033 未加载
评论 #44109155 未加载
评论 #44103888 未加载
romaaeterna3일 전
As someone who remembers what the web was like 25 years ago, I have a feeling that they&#x27;re burying a corpse.
评论 #44099232 未加载
评论 #44099046 未加载
评论 #44101557 未加载
评论 #44102045 未加载
评论 #44099114 未加载
评论 #44099308 未加载
almusdives3일 전
I get why this is problematic for industries that depend on high traffic for ad revenue etc, but is bad for websites who are actually trying to market services that provide tangible value? Like if I’m searching for a dry cleaner in Glasgow, if I end up with the same provider, I don&#x27;t care (and neither does the dry cleaner) whether I find them through traditional links or an AI-mediated search?
评论 #44099021 未加载
评论 #44099417 未加载
oliwarner3일 전
Which is a problem for websites that only provide facts.<p>If your whole business model is getting organic search engine traffic to answer a user&#x27;s question (a time, a result, something they just want to know) then Google is going to eat your dinner and I&#x27;m completely ambivalent because <i>so many</i> of the websites that have been so expertly sculpted to dominate SERPs, are what&#x27;s wrong with the web. It&#x27;s why it deserves to be buried.<p>Before posting this, I&#x27;d just seen this post about asking Forbes whether or not the latest Mission Impossible has a post-credit scene: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bsky.app&#x2F;profile&#x2F;chrisplummer.bsky.social&#x2F;post&#x2F;3lpvxayws6s2w" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bsky.app&#x2F;profile&#x2F;chrisplummer.bsky.social&#x2F;post&#x2F;3lpvx...</a><p>&gt; If you load this page it contacts 82 IP addresses executing 256 separate HTTP transactions to download 18MB of data writing 64 cookies to your device to tell you “no”<p>The web has been on life-support for a while. Ad-blockers <i>just</i> make it bearable, but its existence as an information lookup system is nearly over. It&#x27;s a way to interact with online systems and —occasionally— for reading some long-form content (which is increasingly written by LLMs anyway). Isn&#x27;t the future confusing.
评论 #44102519 未加载
NewsaHackO3일 전
This is actually a good thing, now we don’t have to sift though a dozen semiautomatically created SEO gaming website that try and make the same point 5-6 said in slightly different ways.
评论 #44099369 未加载
评论 #44099650 未加载
评论 #44104471 未加载
评论 #44106567 未加载
DisjointedHunt3일 전
In my humble opinion, Google is the reason the web withstood as long as it did. At least the open part of the web did.<p>Yes, sure, they monetized, but also they gave back as much as, and if not more than they took. We have so many machine learning frameworks, tensorflow, research, payouts to creators, advertising opportunities, careers, products, a lot of things built and taken down but most importantly built. They were probably the most positive force for the internet age in the past 20 years and more than anyone will ever give them credit for. Only in retrospect will we realize how lucky we were to be alive in the Google age. Full stop.<p>What really killed the web was the rise of closed wall gardens platforms such as Apple, Facebook, Instagram and others. Putting up walls around content that didn&#x27;t need to necessarily exist or not honoring open frameworks to exchange information and making things more widely indexable.<p>But even here there have been significant benefits. The present AI boom would arguably not have been as large as it is right now without Mark Zuckerberg choosing to put an unconventional amount of investment behind AR ambitions to take on Apple, an investment the size of which many conventionally run publicly listed or private enterprises could hardly imagine to take up, leading to the concentration of capital, talent, technology and hardware in a place that gave birth to open source Llama and others. Google as well was very well poised because of their investments in compute fueled by their business model which kept the web alive and also returned capital into places where computer scientists would be paid significant amounts of money and have job security and freedom of will. to do as they pleased as opposed to chasing a paycheck, working as a physicist at CERN or something.<p>All I&#x27;m saying is this article does not fully capture how significant the positive outcomes from Google have been.
评论 #44104116 未加载
mitchbob3일 전
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.ph&#x2F;2025.05.26-092025&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nymag.com&#x2F;intelligencer&#x2F;article&#x2F;google-ai-mode-search-results-bury-the-web.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.ph&#x2F;2025.05.26-092025&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nymag.com&#x2F;intel...</a>
Magi6043일 전
I used to hate the AI overview, but I&#x27;ve slowly been getting used to it and now I will often settle for what the AI gives. It&#x27;s better than scrolling through loads of links and trying to weed out garbage SEO optimized sites.
评论 #44100383 未加载
评论 #44108245 未加载
评论 #44100073 未加载
评论 #44100301 未加载
bilater3일 전
So if Google innovates with AI, it&#x27;s a problem because they&#x27;re hiding their &quot;ten blue links.&quot; But if they don&#x27;t, they&#x27;re suffering from the innovator&#x27;s dilemma and are going to die with their ten blue links. The fact is, Google is so big that they&#x27;re always going to upset some people.<p>Embracing AI and moving forward is the only thing they can do.
评论 #44099866 未加载
lzy3일 전
This feels like the culmination of a long trend. Google shifting from indexing the web to replacing it. The idea of an “AI answer mode” burying actual sources is worrying, especially for niche or emerging topics where LLMs hallucinate confidently. I’d love to see metrics on how often users click through to original sources under the new interface. At some point, if Google becomes too self-referential, it risks losing the very web it was built on. Curious whether this opens the door for competitors that prioritise raw links and transparency over synthesised summaries.
评论 #44108670 未加载
kazinator3일 전
Story forget to mention that you can add &quot;fucking ...&quot; to your queries to eliminate the obnoxious and more often incorrect than not AI summaries.
ncr1003일 전
My summary - G is &#x27;burying&#x27; web search results underneath AI results on its search page.
评论 #44098945 未加载
评论 #44099749 未加载
评论 #44099173 未加载
AriedK3일 전
So how long do we have until companies can pay to be in the system prompt to be recommended for certain queries?
评论 #44099047 未加载
评论 #44099430 未加载
评论 #44099630 未加载
MichaelMoser1233일 전
I think publishers will not be pleased about a steep fall in click rates, now publishers still have considerable political influence. What will Google do in the event of serious legal pushback or a renewed drive for antitrust action?<p>The introduction of AI overviews into Google search will cost quite a lot in compute&#x2F;other resources, despite heavy caching, therefore this might be a significant bet in terms of costs vs profit for Google. What does Google expect from this feature in terms of business results? This seems to be quite a big bet, but what is actually at stake - in real terms?<p>Come to think of it: is there now a showdown between Google and Microsoft&#x2F;OpenAI, where collateral costs are no longer taken into account?
shmerl3일 전
I noticed that Google image reverse search turned into completely unusable garbage that can only produce AI lookalikes but completely fails at finding original images. Literally every time, exact match - zero results.<p>I guess that&#x27;s their current trend. Forget about quality search, inject AI everywhere.
joshdappier2일 전
For all struggling web publishers: Your brand won&#x27;t survive as a reference in someone else&#x27;s AI snippet.<p>We&#x27;ve (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dappier.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dappier.com</a>) been working on offerings to solve this for publishers, and help them thrive in an AI-first world. We enable:<p>- AI data syndication, by converting your content into AI-ready formats like RAG API &amp; MCP and enabling devs to connect in real-time at a per-query basis<p>- deploying your own AI experiences. Our AskAI answer engine is totally customizable and has pre-set deployments based on best practices from leading social networks and news sites already deploying AI<p>- agentic ads - the ability to advertise within conversations, taking advantage of an opt-in network of agents to surface products and offerings wherever the relevant user is.<p>Please give us a try (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dappier.com&#x2F;demo" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dappier.com&#x2F;demo</a> to schedule a demo) and let us know what you think!
Rastonbury3일 전
What I want from Google is showing me results (not summaries) from sources that I tell it from natural language. If I know I am going to search for a topic I know is going to be filled with a ton of SEO garbage, I default to chatgpt to get sources for me, unfortunately I still do not trust chatgpt to have done a thorough job but sometimes I can&#x27;t be bother to trawl through blogspam.<p>The reason why chatgpt and perplextty are stealing queries from them is because Search has become so bad.
h4kunamata3일 전
SEO as we knew it gone forever, Google push with its AI drove everything to shit.<p>I used to use Germini and it was pretty good, then it went downhill with wrong answers and I just couldn&#x27;t trust it anymore.<p>That is where I crossed Perplexity ( <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.perplexity.ai&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.perplexity.ai&#x2F;</a> ), it is surprisingly solid and the best part of it: the sources. It even helped to learn Python.<p>It does mention all the sources it used for that answer, so in doubt, you can cross check which is something Gemini failed miserably to do so. There is very minimal &quot;wrong answers&quot; and in doubt, cross check it.<p>I went De-Google years ago with GrapheneOS and everything, I still use Google dot com to check stores reviews because unfortunately, no other search engine provides that info. There are websites only for that but it is not remotely close to Google reviews left by folks.
评论 #44102658 未加载
baq3일 전
I&#x27;m finding that google&#x27;s own gemini flash is cannibalizing google search in my own usage, but there&#x27;s no other way for them to survive being eaten alive by the competition.<p>The sad realization is you probably shouldn&#x27;t expect humans to read your content anymore - it&#x27;ll be quoted verbatim (best case) by the all-consuming LLMs, just without your ads, your layout or anything yours at all that isn&#x27;t your written or spoken words. (Sad part is that&#x27;s often an improvement until chat interfaces start putting product placement in their responses. We can truly bury the web then.)
rambambram3일 전
I only do physical offline marketing for some time now. Works well enough and one stands out among all the clickbait and other foolery. Some index disappearing is not a problem. The moment organizations or institutions start burning the libraries down, then we have a bigger problem.<p>Don&#x27;t get fooled by people who claim the open web is dead. The moment you start believing that, then you are exactly where they want you to be.
scotty793일 전
Maybe Google should use AI to de-rank ad filled seo spam.
bfrog3일 전
There’s no web. There’s big ad companies striving to keep eyeballs. There’s a few lone bastions of what was. Mostly it’s ads.
1vuio0pswjnm73일 전
Computer owners finance www through Internet Service Provider subscriptions fees. Users of www upload content at their own expense. Google produces zero content at zero expense, stores content of www users, monitors their www use. Google profits, becomes trillion dollar company. What happens next.
miguel-muniz2일 전
when you could just type a question into a chatbox and receive a well thought out, nuanced response instead of having to click into multiple ad-ridden, seo &quot;&quot;optimized&quot;&quot; websites just to find an answer isn&#x27;t it obvious why one is winning over the other?<p>for many people, they just want an answer to their question. whatever means they get that answer doesn&#x27;t really matter. the new trend of locking your website content behind a sign in wall or app download is only going push more people to chatbots.
kevin_thibedeau3일 전
I have to resort to using ChatGPT to find any historical information because of the recency bias in all conventional search engines. Never mind their penchant for stuffing results with e-commerce sites no matter how irrelevant they are to the query.
DataDaemon3일 전
Goodbye small blogs and medium publishers, it was nice to read you. Now Google take your unique content, rewrite and present on their website. There will be no incentive anymore to write a new content. You will get NOTHING for your hard work. Bye.
评论 #44099094 未加载
threesmegiste3일 전
It may reduce the tendency to visit websites. But I do the same with YouTube videos. I share the link with Gemini and summarize it. I think Google will not allow this after a while.
jameslk3일 전
Business idea: build a firewall for AI crawlers that variably gives them access to customer’s sites based on traffic they send. The more traffic they send, the more they are allowed to crawl.
评论 #44099561 未加载
amadeuspagel3일 전
Yeah when I&#x27;m scrolling past the AI overview to click on the links it feels like I&#x27;m digging out someone buried alive with my bare hands to breathe new life into him.
panarchy3일 전
The web has been a walking corpse for about a decade now.
jrm43일 전
The hardest issue in &quot;fixing&quot; this is &quot;reminding people that the web is open and you can kind of do whatever you want here.&quot;
gloosx2일 전
How to fix Google:<p>1. Install User-Agent Switcher for Chrome plugin.<p>2. Choose older browser, like IE 10 or Iphone 6, refresh the page.<p>3. You&#x27;re now getting &quot;old google&quot; results. Seeing first 5 links without scrolling. Accurate and concise.<p>The contrast is STARK. There is no &quot;AI overview&quot;. There is no &quot;From sources across the web&quot;. There is no &quot;People also ask&quot;. No &quot;People also search for&quot;. No &quot;At a glance&quot; section. No &quot;Images&quot; section, nor &quot;youtube&quot; section taking 50% of the page. No &quot;Short videos&quot; tab. Just. Search. Results.
carlosjobim3일 전
Lazy publishers could have solved this years ago, by making massive syndicates, paid by a single subscription. YouTube did it, and has become a modern wonder of the world.<p>But no, of course they can&#x27;t syndicate together with other newspapers or magazines who aren&#x27;t 100% psychotically equally aligned with them politically.<p>So they get what&#x27;s coming to them. They shouldn&#x27;t have been megalomaniacs, but that&#x27;s all they are now.
tmnvix3일 전
I&#x27;ve said this before, but I sincerely believe that a human-curated internet directory would be a great resource. Maybe something along the lines of Yahoo Directory revived? Organised using the dewey system could be useful. A library for the internet.<p>I&#x27;d love to be able to look up something like say &#x27;shoe repair&#x27; and find a host of high quality resources such as videos, tutorials, suppliers, etc, all vetted by real people somehow.
评论 #44101942 未加载
评论 #44104752 未加载
mattferderer3일 전
Google has been getting this push back for the last 15 years. (That makes me feel old to remember it)<p>Google Knowledge Graph (that sidebar they show) was hated by publishers, especially Wiki for stealing their content.<p>Google adding direct answers to questions.<p>Lots of fights over social media &amp; recipe results.<p>I&#x27;m not arguing who is right or wrong,* just saying this has been a thing for a long time.<p>* Exception most recipe websites &amp; those infinite looping Pinterest blog links. Those websites are all awful &amp; wrong.
intended3일 전
Forgive this weirdly philosophical comment: In a year of dark thoughts I found yet another horror to contemplate, after reading a legal paper on the idea of the marketplace of ideas.<p>A core concept underpinning our shared market place, is that its not about facts, its about ideas being exchanged.<p>Critically, that exchange creates friction, debate and downstream of all that - society. I&#x27;ve commented elsewhere how the marketplace is broken today, and why.<p>But with GenAI, theres a new, twist, that I can barely contemplate.<p>See, our conception of this liberal democracy based society, exists in that exchange between people. Even a crappy exchange, is part of the process of learning and building our ideas. My half formed ideas, your half formed ideas, everyones ideas.<p>We have considered what happens when your ideas don&#x27;t get heard.<p>But in no place, did we consider what happens when we bounce our ideas <i>into</i> a machine, and that machine talks back. And if that machine talks back in a manner thats can be as good as what a person might write or text. Your half baked idea goes into the machine, you get text back that helps you get to a fully baked idea.<p>But the counter party is the machine. Not a person. The way those ideas have been bouncing around, has changed.
j_timberlake3일 전
This is like the frog in the boiling water story, except Frog is worried about being boiled alive after the temperature has only risen .001 degrees, so he writes articles saying &quot;Google is burying the web alive&quot; begging for someone to save him.
DataDaemon3일 전
Soon, quick and dirty solution: User-Agent: * Disallow: &#x2F;
评论 #44100442 未加载
notnullorvoid3일 전
AI summaries aren&#x27;t the problem, they are a poor solution to a overwhelming amount of slop content. Search engine results have been getting worse and worse for over a decade, and with a rapidly increasing collection of content the web is getting too big to search. AI will be necessary, but it&#x27;s not going to change the course, it will be deployed on both the solution and the problem front.<p>If I had to pick the biggest contributor to the problem it would be advertising. Which mainly means Google, and governments for allowing an ad and search monopoly under the same roof. People can make all the justifications they want about how ad revenue allowed businesses and individuals to prosper, and &quot;free&quot; access to content, but it was always borrowing against the future.
guluarte3일 전
the only thing google will win doing this in the long term is new laws that you&#x27;ll need to opt in for training AI models
mortsnort3일 전
Perhaps we need legislation requiring LLMs to compensate the sources they steal from? If the LLMs kill the hand that feeds them, it&#x27;s bad for everyone.
mac-mc3일 전
Correction: burying our business model alive
johneth3일 전
Surely as the traffic Google sends to websites falls and falls, there&#x27;ll come a tipping point where the websites themselves will feel there&#x27;s no benefit to allowing Google to index them.<p>If this happens, Google&#x27;s generative AI slop will have less and less scaped and regurgitated content to surface to Google users.
anal_reactor3일 전
literal mind control
sakopov3일 전
Google is damned-if-they-do, damned-if-they-don’t. One side screams that Google Search is dead because Google doesn&#x27;t innovate. The other - Google AI innovation is killing the web.
评论 #44099397 未加载