Comment

Comment on Google Search Really Has Gotten Worse, Researchers Find

Anyone who creates genuine good content has a healthy and mutually beneficial relationship with Google.

I’ve switched to Ecosia and while it’s not perfect, I now find what I look for, which became impossible with Google somewhere about 2014-2016, I think?

I know it’s a “secondary” search engine.

But the thing is that no, hundred times no, anyone who generates ad revenue has a healthy and mutually beneficial relationship with Google. Everyone else gets screwed.

Switching to Ecosia alone made me much more comfortable with using Web.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Carighan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

I’ve switched to Ecosia and while it’s not perfect, I now find what I look for, which became impossible with Google somewhere about 2014-2016, I think?

Ecosia’s results are pulled from Bing, and as the very paper linked here shows, Bing’s results are significantly worse than Google’s, even accounting for Google’s deteriorating result quality. Notice in particular the percentage of spam.

source
- rottingleaf@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Worse for whom?
  
  source
  - Carighan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Did you read the paper this thread here is ultimately all about?
    
    source
    rottingleaf@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    The paper - I have not, the article - yes.
    
    I’ve looked through the paper diagonally now, and since it’s a scanned PDF, I’ll get back to it to read it patiently.
    
    I still see that they chose one criterion which is maybe less relevant for things I look for, which are usually not very popular. There’s probably a curve somewhere which is better for Bing, apparently, than for Google in that point.
    
    Because it’s my personal experience that I find things much faster with Ecosia than with Google.
    
    source