4 ms·

I am increasingly convinced that the successor/replacement to Google will not be a more clever, AI-powered search engine, but a hyper-curated collection of link

I am increasingly convinced that the successor/replacement to Google will not be a more clever, AI-powered search engine, but a hyper-curated collection of links, selected by people who understand what good content is. Sort of like Yahoo in the pre-Google days. I think this is only going to become more apparent once AI-generated content takes over the web.

internetter 3y ago
I’m working on a pinboard competitor (that is, essentially, just reviving development of it) One thing I want to look into is ranking algorithms based on individual engagement. So, if you save lots of stories from a site, it ranks higher. If lots of people save stories from a site, it also ranks higher, ect
- nottorp 3y ago
  And... when the bots come and "engage", what will you do?
  - internetter 3y ago
    1. Voting rings are one of the easiest types of spam to detect. Of course, the bigger the service the better the bots, but that problem specifically is a later issue 2. Zero tolerance to bots 3. The service is not free 4. Individuals have very little impact on the rankings of other users, so you need to pay for a lot of bots I believe that the true problem with bots on, say, twitter, is that they have perverse incentives to 'boost engagement' and whatever by allowing the bots to run rampant.
    - nottorp 3y ago
      > The service is not free That may fix things on its own ;) Now would I pay to see what other people 'engage' with? I'd probably associate it with the likes of facebook/twitter/other social networking crap and I'd just move along...
gandalfgreybeer 3y ago
Very tangential but your description is exactly why I've dropped most streaming services except for the Criterion Channel.
sph 3y ago
I agree but we need to wait the next AI Winter, right now everybody is on the LLM hype train.
abenga 3y ago
This assumes the breadth of "things I will ever want to search in the future" is contained in whatever these "people" consider to be useful knowledge. Should we create such a group and have them thoughtfully consider every present and past field of knowledge, language, place on earth, political/religious viewpoint, and so on.
- keiferski 3y ago
  Well I imagine that searches probably follow a Pareto 80/20 rule to some extent. In other words, 80% of searches are on 20% of total topics. So the hypothetical group would focus on those high volume search topics first.
  - abenga 3y ago
    I also imagine the things I search most rarely may be the most pressing compared to the ones I do all the time (as an individual, the things I search most often, I probably know where to go to find the info directly -- API docs and such).
nojvek 3y ago
I am convinced it won’t be human curated but AI curated. All information well organized without ads and junk. Like a super glorified Wikipedia with excellent search to dig exactly what you want.

internetter 3y ago

I’m working on a pinboard competitor (that is, essentially, just reviving development of it) One thing I want to look into is ranking algorithms based on individual engagement. So, if you save lots of stories from a site, it ranks higher. If lots of people save stories from a site, it also ranks higher, ect

nottorp 3y ago
And... when the bots come and "engage", what will you do?
- internetter 3y ago
  1. Voting rings are one of the easiest types of spam to detect. Of course, the bigger the service the better the bots, but that problem specifically is a later issue 2. Zero tolerance to bots 3. The service is not free 4. Individuals have very little impact on the rankings of other users, so you need to pay for a lot of bots I believe that the true problem with bots on, say, twitter, is that they have perverse incentives to 'boost engagement' and whatever by allowing the bots to run rampant.
  - nottorp 3y ago
    > The service is not free That may fix things on its own ;) Now would I pay to see what other people 'engage' with? I'd probably associate it with the likes of facebook/twitter/other social networking crap and I'd just move along...

gandalfgreybeer 3y ago

Very tangential but your description is exactly why I've dropped most streaming services except for the Criterion Channel.

sph 3y ago

I agree but we need to wait the next AI Winter, right now everybody is on the LLM hype train.

abenga 3y ago

This assumes the breadth of "things I will ever want to search in the future" is contained in whatever these "people" consider to be useful knowledge. Should we create such a group and have them thoughtfully consider every present and past field of knowledge, language, place on earth, political/religious viewpoint, and so on.

keiferski 3y ago
Well I imagine that searches probably follow a Pareto 80/20 rule to some extent. In other words, 80% of searches are on 20% of total topics. So the hypothetical group would focus on those high volume search topics first.
- abenga 3y ago
  I also imagine the things I search most rarely may be the most pressing compared to the ones I do all the time (as an individual, the things I search most often, I probably know where to go to find the info directly -- API docs and such).

nojvek 3y ago

I am convinced it won’t be human curated but AI curated. All information well organized without ads and junk. Like a super glorified Wikipedia with excellent search to dig exactly what you want.