> AI will lead to more queries because I search differently with AI results than an index/page rank result. If you do 1000 queries a day, it would take you twe

> AI will lead to more queries because I search differently with AI results than an index/page rank result. If you do 1000 queries a day, it would take you twenty years before you expect to hit a problematic query, assuming such errors are random. First, almost no one makes that many queries a day, and second, the errors come mostly from being silly, not when trying to find accurate information. > Also, it’s not about the unique queries, but the number of users running them. This seems like “data waving” where google is giving some not relevant number hoping to distract from the issue they can’t or don’t want to solve. I actually want to know once per 7M unique queries more than 10M users (or w/e the number is). Memes spread, so users don't tell me what their failure rate actually looks like. > The measure should be impact of bad queries and bad info. Or amount of garbage responded. Most stuff on the internet already is garbage advice and bad info. Much of this is due to SEO spam, but it's also because there are far fewer experts than bloggers (e.g. on the topic of AI). Now, I think the best solution would be for Google to start punishing SEO spam again so I can actually search for the right information by myself, but it seems possible that the AI Overview could be helpful in the sifting process. > Or even better, confusion created in people based on AI responses. I mean, this is a pretty difficult measure to figure out, even through polling. People aren't really trained to notice when they're confused, and it's pretty difficult to know you saw misinformation when you were looking up the information for the first time.