3 ms·

You are using it right however your bias is evident on the results. A 20-something will just scroll through the blog content to get to the recipe at the end. No

You are using it right however your bias is evident on the results. A 20-something will just scroll through the blog content to get to the recipe at the end. No huss, no fuss. In fact, they’ll open multiple tabs of search results to compare recipes in the time it takes you to gawk at the fact that you have to scroll to the end. Where is the recipe? Why is there a video? Table of contents? No, a 20-something will just flick their screen wildly until they are at the bottom, and scroll up. Give me the results and backtrack to where I’m at. This I think is a result of their upbringing and everyone’s focus on results rather than process. So you may believe you are doing everything correct but you are just going through the motions. The web today is different than it was even 5 years ago. I wish I could search like I used to but we are where we are.

Semaphor 3y ago
> A 20-something will just scroll through the blog content to get to the recipe at the end. No huss, no fuss. In fact, they’ll open multiple tabs of search results to compare recipes in the time it takes you to gawk at the fact that you have to scroll to the end. Uh, I do that and I’m 37. But I don’t scroll, I click the button that says "recipe" that’s on pretty much every recipe site. IMO this is mainly about being used to the state of recipe sites on the internet, and has nothing to do with searching.
- underwater 3y ago
  The state of recipe sites is 100% driven by Google. Those sites add the fluff because that is what Google rewards. The actual recipe quality doesn't matter. If I use my example, the page contains: * Bio of the author - Google SEO rewards content written by "real humans", so this is there to appease the bot. * Giant images of overnight oats - This helps the page rank highly on Google Image Search. * Fluffy paragraphs - "The beauty of overnight oats is that you can make them as simple or creative as you’d like. The base recipe is delicious, and filling all on its own. But if you’d like to spruce it up, you can add a variety of toppings and mix-ins, including fresh fruit, nuts, seeds, spices, jams, and more". Is that supposed to be text written for other humans? Google rewards original content, which means recipe sites need to include massive paragraphs of filler to appear like an authoritative source. * Ads - Gotta make the money. * More fluff "Here’s a few reasons why you should to whip up this recipe today…" - Again, this is not text written for humans. * Repeat the fluff, pictures and ads approximately 5 times. * Common questions "Do you have to use yogurt?" - Trying to appeal to Google Instant Answer searches. * Recipe - Finally! * Recipe rating - This allows the site to put a star rating and review count on Google, again, for SEO So, 95% of the content and functionality of that page is an attempt to convince Google into sending traffic, or ads generating revenue, rather than serving the end user. Content on the web has dramatically changed from 20 years ago because publishers are creating content for a broken machine and not for other humans. This negative feedback loop is hurting the web, and not just Google. This leaves the door open for upstarts like ChatGPT or TikTok to gain mindshare.
  - reactordev 3y ago
    100% agree that all the fluff is for the machines and not humans. The web has been broken this way since 2014. The feedback loop is real.
  - Semaphor 3y ago
    Sorry, I might not have been precise enough, I did not mean to say that this is not because of Google, only that knowing how to use recipe sites is very distinct from knowing how to google, you even encounter those sites no matter what SE you use (I haven’t used Google in years).
  - pests 3y ago
    This is more on copyright law than Google. > Recipes can be protected under copyright law if they are accompanied by “substantial literary expression." https://copyrightalliance.org/are-recipes-cookbooks-protected-by-copyright https://copyrightalliance.org/are-recipes-cookbooks-protecte... So the fluff is both an attempt at that substantial literary expression, and a way to differentiate this version of the recipe from 1000 other versions of the _exact_ recipe because the recipe itself is not unqiue or copyrightable! Without it, recipe's would be penalized by the duplicate content penalty Google applies.
    - nulbyte 3y ago
      I think this is more about ads then copyright. All these recipe blogs I've seen still follow with an uncopyrightable list of ingredients and simple directions. The recipe still isn't worthy of copyright, even if the content accompanying it is. Sure, the author may be working on something they are passionate about, but the site itself is all about the ad revenue.
jessriedel 3y ago
The fact that young people have gotten used to inefficiencies and have gotten good at partially working around them does not mean the inefficiencies aren't there. This often works the opposite generational direction: when a young person has a flat tire they often call a road service and wait two hours, while the old guy would install the spare himself in less than 8 minutes. But either way, flat tires are inefficiencies that are best eliminated.
smsm42 3y ago
Looks like what you're saying is that the results are garbage but people who don't know it could be better are fine with it, because they learned it's how the world works and can't be otherwise. While the ones who are cursed with the knowledge that it can be are left to complain.
- candiodari 3y ago
  I learned a trick recently. If you want "copyright-challenged" results, or exact results, try Yandex. It's a worse search engine and, therefore, better at matching exact text.
coldtea 3y ago
>A 20-something will just scroll through the blog content to get to the recipe at the end. No huss, no fuss. In fact, they’ll open multiple tabs of search results to compare recipes in the time it takes you to gawk at the fact that you have to scroll to the end. Where is the recipe? Why is there a video? Table of contents? No, a 20-something will just flick their screen wildly until they are at the bottom, and scroll up I'm over 40 and do that (and the fuzzy stuff / open questions in the top comment). In fact, most 20-somethings are much worse than this - some studies even pin them as worse with most computing use that is not about social media apps.
ravenstine 3y ago
This is pure victim blaming.
- reactordev 3y ago
  If that's your take, it says more about you. We are ALL victims, to something. Sometimes it's our own fault (IP4), sometimes it's not (adtech). Next time, if you feel like a comment is negative or gas lighting or victim blaming or cancel-culture-worthy, you should state your reasons why you feel this way. Instead of stating your opinion as fact. No matter how right you think you are, there are always other perspectives (Israel/Palestine).

Semaphor 3y ago

> A 20-something will just scroll through the blog content to get to the recipe at the end. No huss, no fuss. In fact, they’ll open multiple tabs of search results to compare recipes in the time it takes you to gawk at the fact that you have to scroll to the end. Uh, I do that and I’m 37. But I don’t scroll, I click the button that says "recipe" that’s on pretty much every recipe site. IMO this is mainly about being used to the state of recipe sites on the internet, and has nothing to do with searching.

underwater 3y ago
The state of recipe sites is 100% driven by Google. Those sites add the fluff because that is what Google rewards. The actual recipe quality doesn't matter. If I use my example, the page contains: * Bio of the author - Google SEO rewards content written by "real humans", so this is there to appease the bot. * Giant images of overnight oats - This helps the page rank highly on Google Image Search. * Fluffy paragraphs - "The beauty of overnight oats is that you can make them as simple or creative as you’d like. The base recipe is delicious, and filling all on its own. But if you’d like to spruce it up, you can add a variety of toppings and mix-ins, including fresh fruit, nuts, seeds, spices, jams, and more". Is that supposed to be text written for other humans? Google rewards original content, which means recipe sites need to include massive paragraphs of filler to appear like an authoritative source. * Ads - Gotta make the money. * More fluff "Here’s a few reasons why you should to whip up this recipe today…" - Again, this is not text written for humans. * Repeat the fluff, pictures and ads approximately 5 times. * Common questions "Do you have to use yogurt?" - Trying to appeal to Google Instant Answer searches. * Recipe - Finally! * Recipe rating - This allows the site to put a star rating and review count on Google, again, for SEO So, 95% of the content and functionality of that page is an attempt to convince Google into sending traffic, or ads generating revenue, rather than serving the end user. Content on the web has dramatically changed from 20 years ago because publishers are creating content for a broken machine and not for other humans. This negative feedback loop is hurting the web, and not just Google. This leaves the door open for upstarts like ChatGPT or TikTok to gain mindshare.
- reactordev 3y ago
  100% agree that all the fluff is for the machines and not humans. The web has been broken this way since 2014. The feedback loop is real.
- Semaphor 3y ago
  Sorry, I might not have been precise enough, I did not mean to say that this is not because of Google, only that knowing how to use recipe sites is very distinct from knowing how to google, you even encounter those sites no matter what SE you use (I haven’t used Google in years).
- pests 3y ago
  This is more on copyright law than Google. > Recipes can be protected under copyright law if they are accompanied by “substantial literary expression." https://copyrightalliance.org/are-recipes-cookbooks-protected-by-copyright https://copyrightalliance.org/are-recipes-cookbooks-protecte... So the fluff is both an attempt at that substantial literary expression, and a way to differentiate this version of the recipe from 1000 other versions of the _exact_ recipe because the recipe itself is not unqiue or copyrightable! Without it, recipe's would be penalized by the duplicate content penalty Google applies.
  - nulbyte 3y ago
    I think this is more about ads then copyright. All these recipe blogs I've seen still follow with an uncopyrightable list of ingredients and simple directions. The recipe still isn't worthy of copyright, even if the content accompanying it is. Sure, the author may be working on something they are passionate about, but the site itself is all about the ad revenue.

jessriedel 3y ago

The fact that young people have gotten used to inefficiencies and have gotten good at partially working around them does not mean the inefficiencies aren't there. This often works the opposite generational direction: when a young person has a flat tire they often call a road service and wait two hours, while the old guy would install the spare himself in less than 8 minutes. But either way, flat tires are inefficiencies that are best eliminated.

smsm42 3y ago

Looks like what you're saying is that the results are garbage but people who don't know it could be better are fine with it, because they learned it's how the world works and can't be otherwise. While the ones who are cursed with the knowledge that it can be are left to complain.

candiodari 3y ago
I learned a trick recently. If you want "copyright-challenged" results, or exact results, try Yandex. It's a worse search engine and, therefore, better at matching exact text.

coldtea 3y ago

>A 20-something will just scroll through the blog content to get to the recipe at the end. No huss, no fuss. In fact, they’ll open multiple tabs of search results to compare recipes in the time it takes you to gawk at the fact that you have to scroll to the end. Where is the recipe? Why is there a video? Table of contents? No, a 20-something will just flick their screen wildly until they are at the bottom, and scroll up I'm over 40 and do that (and the fuzzy stuff / open questions in the top comment). In fact, most 20-somethings are much worse than this - some studies even pin them as worse with most computing use that is not about social media apps.

ravenstine 3y ago

This is pure victim blaming.

reactordev 3y ago
If that's your take, it says more about you. We are ALL victims, to something. Sometimes it's our own fault (IP4), sometimes it's not (adtech). Next time, if you feel like a comment is negative or gas lighting or victim blaming or cancel-culture-worthy, you should state your reasons why you feel this way. Instead of stating your opinion as fact. No matter how right you think you are, there are always other perspectives (Israel/Palestine).