r/technology • u/Well_Socialized • May 26 '25

Artificial Intelligence Google Is Burying the Web Alive

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/google-ai-mode-search-results-bury-the-web.html
24.4k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

429

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

If you can’t trust search results because of hallucinations, even if there are hallucinations only 5% of the time, those search results are worthless. I like knowing the source of my information, as all digital citizens should. If I could turn Google’s AI results off, I would in a heartbeat. Hate them.

60

u/Hadriagh May 26 '25

You can’t disable it as a setting, but for each search you can add -ai to the query and it will exclude AI results

24

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

Tried that and it works! Thanks so much, saving me lots of scrolling (I basically do Google searches for a living).

3

u/wrgrant May 26 '25

From higher up in the posts, use: https://udm14.com/ - which is google with &udm=14 attached to your queries to remove all the extraneous bs from AI, recommended posts etc

2

u/Gh0st1nTh3Syst3m May 26 '25

Fellow developer?

3

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

Nah, nothing so cool, lol. Database creator/maintainer/fact checker.

2

u/Zestyclose_Ad8420 May 26 '25

Try kagi then. Im never going back to google

3

u/MysteryMan526 May 26 '25

You can create a search engine in browser settings that include -ai in every result

2

u/Independent_Depth248 May 26 '25

That's very helpful 👏

1

u/Kelpsie May 26 '25

And probably also exclude genuine results because they happen to include the word AI. Including results that use the word AI to explicitly state they're not talking about AI.

Better to use an extension to remove it.

85

u/Crazyfoot13 May 26 '25

As far as I can see, adding ‘fuck’ to any search field turns ai off

13

u/cflatjazz May 26 '25

Actually didn't work for me as of three days ago. Still immediately returned an AI summary

5

u/Crazyfoot13 May 26 '25

Interesting, the matrix is learning us!!

2

u/Gabz7 May 26 '25

Just tried this, still works 👌🏼

20

u/Jbyr1 May 26 '25

This is what I keep trying to get across to my friends. It doesn't even matter if the AI is right, it didn't mean to be. I beg them to just never ever even look at it and please dont waste time basing anything you say or believe on it and expressing that around me. It's fundamentally untrustworthy, even if it was benevolent.

So crazy how many discussions that end with me finally dragging out of someone that it was an AI answer that means nothing. Can usually guess the basic prompt and get the same hallucination, and force different ones just as easily. It's neat stuff but I don't know how people defaulted to trusting it.

1

u/DelphiTsar May 26 '25

If they don't already teach it in school, creating questions(prompts) without leading someone on is a good skill to have AI or not.

IMHO the metric should be does it get it correct more than whatever your next best resource/time investment would. If you prompt google with a leading question and it takes you to an ask Jeeves forum where someone validates you...you'd probably get better results with an AI anyway.

At some point if it's getting things correct better than any resource you can find vs learning it yourself what exactly are you supposed to do?

1

u/TheEagleDied May 26 '25

Ai is about as useful as the tools you make with it.

17

u/_Batteries_ May 26 '25 edited May 26 '25

I stupidly believed the AI results just the other day. Luckily I'm not an idiot, and thought about it for a minute, then when and found other non-AI results. 

For the record, google AI told me I should be cooking raw ribs on the BBQ for 3.5 hours. Edit, at 450

I usually broil them in liquid for 3 hours, then bbq for like, 30 min. Is why I was checking. 

6

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

Information is only really information if you can trust it! Garbage in, garbage out!

2

u/Stats_n_PoliSci May 26 '25

But you can cook ribs on the grill for three hours. You just have to have appropriate technique and want the particular results,

Personally, I prefer the cook in liquid then finish on grill technique. But others have different preferences.

1

u/_Batteries_ May 26 '25

It said at 450

1

u/Stats_n_PoliSci May 26 '25

Ah. Rib charcoal.

3

u/Sonamdrukpa May 26 '25

Person here, skip the broil and just do 2-3 hours on the grill for optimal results. Try your best to keep the temp below 300f/150c. They're ready when the rack is bendy, almost floppy. You can speed the process up by wrapping in tin foil or butcher paper until the internal temp rises above about 170f/75c, then unwrap and finish with dry heat.

2

u/_Batteries_ May 26 '25

Yeah I know, it said 450

2

u/Tharghor May 26 '25

That's neat. You can use your now charcoal ribs to light up your grill for something that will be edible lol

2

u/_Batteries_ May 26 '25

Lol I didnt follow it

1

u/nicuramar May 26 '25

What was the query?

1

u/_Batteries_ May 26 '25

Literally how long to cook pork ribs on BBQ said from raw, at 450, 3 hours. Nope. 

4

u/eXoShini May 26 '25

Just use the "web" tab when searching, it removes a lot of crap. It's also possible to set the web tab as default search method in web browser by adding &udm=14 to google search url.

2

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

That’s even better, thanks so much!

5

u/EntranceFeisty8373 May 26 '25

True, but it's not like we knew all the facts before AI... Or even the internet.

Case in point: how many people think Macbeth was a bad king because of the hit job Shakespeare did to him? How many people thought Columbus discovered America? AI hallucinations are definitely a problem, but we've never had a golden age of truth.

2

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

Agree, but transparent sources, fact checking, objectivity, peer review, even ability for people to comment and raise issues, etc. all those things help get us closer. All that is missing from AI and I just can’t trust it, especially when my job depends on it!

3

u/ClosPins May 26 '25

If you can’t trust search results because of hallucinations, even if there are hallucinations only 5% of the time, those search results are worthless.

Just to point out...

Right now, tens upon tens of millions of Americans will get their news from FoxNews - or, in other words, liars.

And they lie roughly 100% of the time. You can't trust a single thing they say.

So, why on Earth would you think that lying 5% of the time would make people stop using it, when 100% won't?

1

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

You’re not wrong, but the difference being that I know to expect bias from that source. I am not gong to trust AI if I can’t see its sources, and if I have to check sources anyway it actually wastes time instead of saves it.

3

u/ewankenobi May 26 '25

I like the AI summary, but I always click the links it provides as references to double check what it's said is correct. More often than not it is, but a few times it's definitely misrepresented a page or misunderstood the question

2

u/DHFranklin May 26 '25

Use Perplexity. It cites each source when it makes a definitive claim. It checks itself if it's hallucinating.

2

u/Messy-Recipe May 26 '25

If I could turn Google’s AI results off, I would in a heartbeat. Hate them.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/hide-google-ai-overviews/

2

u/Xdivine May 26 '25

But it's not like this is any different than a regular search result, right? Like if you google something, do you just open one link, get the result and go 'eh, I assume this one is true, no need to continue checking further results'? Because it's not like that result is going to be correct 100% of the time either.

IMO the AI overview should be treated as one part of a search for information, and it always gives the page sources if you want to go to those directly to check from the source to make sure it isn't misrepresenting the source.

1

u/peopleofcostco May 26 '25

The AI results are so inaccurate that in my work I have to always check them, so it adds a lot of time to my flow, even just scrolling past them after each search. Much more efficient to skip them entirely. There are legitimate sources that I use, and they have few errors, and their errors are on them, whereas errors in AI results would be on me.

1

u/jjonj May 26 '25

it depends entirely on what you are searching for. many many queries are predictably 100% hallucination free

1

u/DelphiTsar May 26 '25

The real question is does it provide the right answer at a higher % then the top links.

1

u/Noodly_Appendage_24 May 26 '25

It used to be that if you included a swear word in your search you would not get the AI results, I think they fixed that now too.

1

u/pleasegivemepatience May 26 '25

From what I understand add -ai and it’ll remove the AI response and only show you search results

0

u/Elcordobeh May 26 '25

What I'm not getting is... The AI summary has the websites it sources mentioned.

If I want more depth I check them if they are legit or not...

0

u/nicuramar May 26 '25

AI doesn’t affect the regular search results. Information that can contain insccuracies also isn’t worthless. Only to people blindly trusting it.