It’s not helpful for OOP since they’re on iOS, but there’s a Firefox extension that works on desktop and Android that hides the AI overview in searches: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/addon/hide-google-ai-overviews/
Deepseek also gets this wrong.
So she is in heat …
This is why no one can find anything on Google anymore, they don’t know how to google shit.
We all know how AI has made things worse, but here’s some context on how it’s outright backwards.
Early search engines had a context problem. To use an example from “Halt and Catch Fire”, if you search for “Texas Cowboy”, do you mean the guys on horseback driving a herd of cows, or do you mean the football team? If you search for “Dallas Cowboys”, should that bias the results towards a different answer? Early, naive search engines gave bad results for cases like that. Spat out whatever keywords happen to hit the most.
Sometimes, it was really bad. In high school, I was showing a history teacher how to use search engines, and he searched for “China golden age”. All results were asian porn. I think we were using Yahoo.
AltaVista largely solved the context problem. We joke about its bad results now, but it was one of the better search engines before Google PageRank.
Now we have AI unsolving the problem.
I was okay with keyword results. If you knew what you were dealing with in the search engine, you could usually find what you were looking for.
deleted by creator
It works. It will also find others who posted that question.
Why use many word when few work
“How to to describe a character in my story hiding a body after they committed a murder?”
⬇️
“killed someone, how to hide body?”
deleted by creator
As a funny challenge I like to come up with simplified, stupid-sounding, 3-word search queries for complex questions, and more often than not it’s good enough to get me the information I’m looking for.
Why do people Google questions anyway?
Because it gives better responses.
Google and all the other major search engines have built in functionality to perform natural language processing on the user’s query and the text in its index to perform a search more precisely aligned with the user’s desired results, or to recommend related searches.
If the functionality is there, why wouldn’t we use it?
deleted by creator
I just tested. “Angelina jolie heat” gives me tons of shit results, I have to scroll all the way down and then click on “show more results” in order to get the filmography.
“Is angelina jolie in heat” gives me this bluesky post as the first answer and the wikipedia and IMDb filmographies as 2nd and 3rd answer.
So, I dunno, seems like you’re wrong.
Have people just completely forgot how search engines work? If you search for two things and get shit results, it means those two things don’t appear together.
it’s truly shocking how bad people are at seeking information. It literally took me 20 seconds to discover she’s not in the movie heat.
I mean, when even people on Lemmy (who are supposed to be a bit more tech literate and stuff) insist that the solution is cutting a couple 2 letter words from your search query to make everything much shorter and efficient, are you even surprised?
I’ve been thinking for a while that people seem to be getting dumber and it might actually be true I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that fascism and other forms of conservatism seem to be on the rise pretty much everywhere in the world.
Search engine algorithms are way better than in the 90s and early 2000s when it was naive keyword search completely unweighted by word order in the search string.
So the tricks we learned of doing the bare minimum for the most precise search behavior no longer apply the same way. Now a search for two words will add weight to results that have the two words as a phrase, and some weight for the two words close together in the same sentence, but still look for each individual word as a result, too.
More importantly, when a single word has multiple meanings, the search engines all use the rest of the search as an indicator of which meaning the searcher means. “Heat” is a really broad word with lots of meanings, and the rest of the search can help inform the algorithm of what the user intends.
That’s why you just add “movie” to the search.
Or do IMDb heat or IMDb jolie or something
deleted by creator
“You can just type your search in the top bar! You don’t have to go to www.google.com.”
As an IT guy, I know what to expect when I get to hell.
could not resolve the address “heat angelina jolie”
You won’t get funny answers if you do it correctly.
Because that’s the normal way in which humans communicate.
But for Google more specifically, that sort of keyword prompts is how you searched stuff in the '00s… Nowadays the search prompt actually understands natural language, and even has features like “people also ask” that are related to this.
All in all, do whatever works for you, it’s just that asking questions isn’t bad.
deleted by creator
Because we’re human, and that’s a human-made tool. It’s made to fit us and our needs, not the other way around. And in case you’ve missed the last decade, it actually does it rather well.
Except Google has been optimizing for natural language questions for the last decade or so. Try it sometime, it’s really wild
deleted by creator
We spend most of our time communicating with humans so we’re generally better at that than communicating with algorithms and so it feels more comfortable.
Most people don’t want to learn to communicate with a search engine in its own language. Learning is hard.
deleted by creator
Do you think you were born knowing what search terms are?
You weren’t born with the knowledge of written language either.
Surely you see how using a search engine is a separate skill from just writing words?
Point is, people don’t want to learn. Natural language searches in the form of questions are just easier for people, because they already know how to ask questions.
deleted by creator
Whattt
Why wouldn’t I include “the” “a” other articles etc. if I had language but no tech skills
Tell me you’re too young to have used “Ask Jeeves” without telling me
NGL, I learned some things.
ddg isn’t really any better with that exact search query. all ‘fashion’ related items on the first page.
you get the expected top result (imdb page for the film ‘heat’, which you have to scroll through to determine your ‘answer’) by using simply: angelina jolie heat
In short: BONK
It probably thought you were Elon Musk.
Everyone in this post is the annoying IT person who says “why don’t you just run Linux?” to people who don’t even fully understand what an OS is in the first place.
Installing a whole new OS is not good comparison to browser. We all downloaded chrome using internet explorer at some point before.
You are included in my initial assertion
Heat is an excellent movie, and one of my top five. Coincidentally, I just watched it last night. For a film released in 1998, it has aged well. OOP is in the ballpark, too - a young Natalie Portman is in it, not Jolie.
Yeah it’s a movie that nails “then suddenly… all hell breaks loose.”
It’s hilarious I got the same results with Charlize Theron with the exact same movie, I guess we both don’t know who actresses are apparently.
I never heard of the movie and was enjoying the content you created that I thought was supposed to be funny.
Why is the search query in the top and bottom different?
Google correction does not reflect in the tab name; genuinely happens
