• WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    144
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    As intended.

    First they’re going to collapse the ad model by eliminating most clicks.

    Then they’re going to put all of the information they’ve been scraping from the now-bankrupt websites behind paywalls.

    • cecilkorik@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Joke’s on them, I’ve already been working on that for decades. *pats ublock* This baby can bankrupt so many websites and I always hoped it could collapse the ad model completely.

      In all seriousness, it’s becoming increasingly clear that we’re eventually going to have to build a new, free internet out of the wreckage of this one once the corporations are done with it. Technically it’s already there, nascent but ever so slowly growing and taking root, hiding in plain sight. Like the so-called dark web of tor, it already exists in parallel to the existing structures of the internet. Call it the deep web, the indie web, nostalgia web, unsearchable web, I’ve heard countless terms and most of them aren’t terribly accurate, but the web doesn’t need ads and google search to exist, it never did. It just needs humans, which despite the best efforts of big tech many of us still are, communicating directly with one another and documenting our billions of lifetimes of diverse collective experiences and knowledge.

      We are the wealth of information in the internet. Corporations don’t own it. We are it.

      • handsoffmydata@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        I see your ublock and raise you Pihole.

        The internet has always had ads, some of the most obnoxious were those mid to late 90s banner ads with sound. I’ll never forget loading a random page and my speakers screaming: Helllllloooooooooo.

      • WatDabney@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 days ago

        Very much yes.

        I have this great visual image of the corporate web, marked by neon signs and billboards and holographic ads, populated entirely by bots talking to each other while the humans sneak away, giggling and shushing each other.

      • bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’ve been wondering how we can build a new underground net that is just the internet of 2002, but with more bandwidth. Somewhere normies can’t access easily and with a bad ui so they don’t want to.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          What kind of revisionist bullshit is this?

          Like, it’s almost always safe to write off anyone using “normies” but do you think 2002 was like in movies/TV?

          “The net” wasn’t some secret thing, kids had been using it in school for over a decade.

          I can’t tell if you weren’t born then or already 50 years old…

          But wherever you’re getting your opinions on 2002 internet, it wasn’t first hand

          • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            3 days ago

            As a 50-something, I can see the case for putting the “golden age” of the internet between the birth of Wikipedia in 2001 and Facebook in 2006.

            • jaybone@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              2 days ago

              I’d expand it a bit further. Maybe 1999 to 2009. While Facebook did exist towards the end there, everyone’s grandmother wasn’t on it yet and they weren’t entirely intrusive and walled gardened. Forums still existed. Search engines still returned good results.
              But it was the beginning of what would come. After 2009 it went downhill fast.

          • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            It’s just nostalgia applied to the internet. Some people call it Eternal September. Everyone prefers what the internet was when they first discovered it and hate what it’s become since then. I remember the internet from 1996 most fondly. Many prefer it from the 80s or earlier 90s. This is no different from other media: music, TV, movies.

            Of course this is separate from the real issue which is the consolidation and silo-ification of the modern web.

            • Balder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Yeah, the best is never going to be “now”, which is always drown in uncertainty and chaos. When you look back, everything looks safe and deterministic.

          • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Punch the Monkey, Shake the Tree, Bonzi Buddy, flash animation, sites that only worked in IE, etc, etc.

            You’re right, anyone who thinks 2002 was some golden age of the internet clearly wasn’t there.

          • bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            As what was said below, it was kind of a golden age. It was usable by normal people but still pretty novel to most. And it was a while before corporations ruined it. I lived through it so I can confirm it was better in most ways, besides speeds. I should say, 05 would be a better choice.

    • ori@hj.9fs.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Why would they do that, when they can charge advertisers to bias the LLM? How much do you think Adidas would pay to have their products advantages mixed into any response about sports gear, undetectable?

      CC: @[email protected]

    • logicbomb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 days ago

      As intended.

      Yes. The secret to telling what a search engine wants you to do is whatever is on top of the search results.

      You and I might scour the results to find the exact best results, but most people simply look at the very first thing they’re presented with and call it a day.

      When I saw all of the search engines putting AI answers first, I knew they were intentionally trying to stop people from clicking through.

      • lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I’m not sure I fully understand the play here. Like, what’s the grand vision? Fewer click-throughs == less ad impressions, no? They just want you to see the AdWords ads only? I’m not sure it’s a fully-baked idea. I’m not convinced they can really create a moat around all information on the web

        Would welcome any additional insights

        • MacStainless@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s to keep you on Google as long as possible. Google doesn’t care about ad impressions off-site. Look at it this way:

          You search for something and AI surfaces full answers to you at the top. Now, Google can “alter the deal” in the near-future where “sponsored AI results” come into play and are incorporated into The Answer. THAT is the gold mine. Right now (and forever) it’s been about being on the first page of results and now it’s about being the first result “above the fold” so people don’t even need to scroll. This is going to change to be the “AI answer” so your website / product / service is mixed into the answer. Pay-for-play just like everything else.

          This method will rapidly train users to just search, view AI results, then click through those paid results or move onto something else. Those AI incporated impressions will make Google money and the possible click-through from the AI answer will yield more money.

          Companies are already working to optimize so AIs will recommend their products and services when people ask things like “I’m going on vacation to the mountains for a week. What gear would you recommend?”

        • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 days ago

          Google probably wants to keep you on google.com, where they have ads. By doing the AI stuff, you never click through to someone else’s page. They get 100% of the interactions and can sell all the clicks.

          It’s monopoly stuff. They should be stopped, with whatever box of liberty is needed.