4 ms·

> The more you tell your assistant, the better it can help you, so when you ask it to recommend a good restaurant nearby, it’ll provide options based on what yo

> The more you tell your assistant, the better it can help you, so when you ask it to recommend a good restaurant nearby, it’ll provide options based on what you like to eat and how far you want to drive. Ask it for a good coffee maker, and it’ll recommend choices within your budget from your favorite brands with only your best interests in mind. The search will be personal and contextual and excitingly so! Actually Google is already doing this. Results are personalized and contextual. It can't really know what I feel like eating this evening because I don't, but it can guess. I applaud the author for trying, but I don't see an alternative to PageRank being proposed. How exactly is Kagi proposing to rank results? And no, I don't want an AI generated summary when I search for the best tutorial to do X. I want a list of tutorials. The question is how to rank that list, and I've yet to see anyone do a better job than Google. Google is far more than PageRank. Its an AI ranking model that has the largest training dataset (queries and clicks). Ads may suck, but simply charging for the same service isn't really innovative. Would I pay for a version of Google without ads? Probably not. But that's just me - I actually like to know who is advertising for particular searches. A company with an ad budget to rank at the top of ads is probably more trustworthy than an anonymous website.

low_tech_love 4y ago
I think the point is precisely that PageRank is not being used anymore.
- akrymski 4y ago
  Oh but it most likely does use PR. Where do you think they get the results from? Are they scraping the web themselves? I highly doubt it. Results probably come from Bing.
mrkramer 4y ago
>Ads may suck, but simply charging for the same service isn't really innovative. Would I pay for a version of Google without ads? Probably not. Google already does this with YT; YouTube Premium[1] offers you YT experience without ads plus extra perks. And YouTube Premium has apparently more than 25 million subscribers in US alone[2] and 80 million subscribers globally[3]. My thinking is power users are ready to pay for ad-free experience and casual users probably not because they are not heavy users. >But that's just me - I actually like to know who is advertising for particular searches. A company with an ad budget to rank at the top of ads is probably more trustworthy than an anonymous website. A lot of spammers and fraudsters see advertising as their most effective gateway and tactic to scamming people so I wouldn't count on reliability and safety of all ads that you see. [1] https://www.youtube.com/premium https://www.youtube.com/premium [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261865/youtube-premium-subscribers/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261865/youtube-premium-... [3] https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/youtube-music-premium-80-million-lyor-cohen/ https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/youtube-music-premium-8...
- three_seagrass 4y ago
  That's no really relevant to Google or Kagi. YT Premium is a reaction to the infeasibility of subsidizing the extreme cost of hosting video streaming with ads alone. The scale of ads needed to cover hours of streaming video vs. ads to cover search results are magnitudes in difference, and people are more willing to pay to make those streaming ads disappear. Even so, with a paid option, the vast majority of YT users still use Youtube w/o the Premium subscription.
- ukd1 4y ago
  I find YT premium fully worth it; the ads are horrible, and totally inturrupt watching something - enough that I pay, as I couldn't stand it otherwise. Google, less so - but I pay for Kagi as I like the results better, and prefer how they say they're tracking me.
- lossolo 4y ago
  I'm paying for YouTube Premium and you get YouTube Music for free + ad-free too. I've started paying because ads were annoying on my smart TV YT app and I already used YT Music.
  - zanmat0 4y ago
    https://github.com/yuliskov/SmartTubeNext https://github.com/yuliskov/SmartTubeNext
- akrymski 4y ago
  YouTube ads are much much worse interstitial style ads that won't let you see the video until you watch an ad. That's why Netflix does well too. I don't think it's a relevant comparison.
naasking 4y ago
> Google is far more than PageRank. Its an AI ranking model that has the largest training dataset (queries and clicks). That doesn't necessarily make it better for HN users. A more selective dataset could make it more useful to specific niches, like say, HN users?

low_tech_love 4y ago

I think the point is precisely that PageRank is not being used anymore.

akrymski 4y ago
Oh but it most likely does use PR. Where do you think they get the results from? Are they scraping the web themselves? I highly doubt it. Results probably come from Bing.

mrkramer 4y ago

>Ads may suck, but simply charging for the same service isn't really innovative. Would I pay for a version of Google without ads? Probably not. Google already does this with YT; YouTube Premium[1] offers you YT experience without ads plus extra perks. And YouTube Premium has apparently more than 25 million subscribers in US alone[2] and 80 million subscribers globally[3]. My thinking is power users are ready to pay for ad-free experience and casual users probably not because they are not heavy users. >But that's just me - I actually like to know who is advertising for particular searches. A company with an ad budget to rank at the top of ads is probably more trustworthy than an anonymous website. A lot of spammers and fraudsters see advertising as their most effective gateway and tactic to scamming people so I wouldn't count on reliability and safety of all ads that you see. [1] https://www.youtube.com/premium https://www.youtube.com/premium [2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261865/youtube-premium-subscribers/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1261865/youtube-premium-... [3] https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/youtube-music-premium-80-million-lyor-cohen/ https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/youtube-music-premium-8...

three_seagrass 4y ago
That's no really relevant to Google or Kagi. YT Premium is a reaction to the infeasibility of subsidizing the extreme cost of hosting video streaming with ads alone. The scale of ads needed to cover hours of streaming video vs. ads to cover search results are magnitudes in difference, and people are more willing to pay to make those streaming ads disappear. Even so, with a paid option, the vast majority of YT users still use Youtube w/o the Premium subscription.
ukd1 4y ago
I find YT premium fully worth it; the ads are horrible, and totally inturrupt watching something - enough that I pay, as I couldn't stand it otherwise. Google, less so - but I pay for Kagi as I like the results better, and prefer how they say they're tracking me.
lossolo 4y ago
I'm paying for YouTube Premium and you get YouTube Music for free + ad-free too. I've started paying because ads were annoying on my smart TV YT app and I already used YT Music.
- zanmat0 4y ago
  https://github.com/yuliskov/SmartTubeNext https://github.com/yuliskov/SmartTubeNext
akrymski 4y ago
YouTube ads are much much worse interstitial style ads that won't let you see the video until you watch an ad. That's why Netflix does well too. I don't think it's a relevant comparison.

naasking 4y ago

> Google is far more than PageRank. Its an AI ranking model that has the largest training dataset (queries and clicks). That doesn't necessarily make it better for HN users. A more selective dataset could make it more useful to specific niches, like say, HN users?