[Barrin92]

because the rarest sources of the web were relatively speaking much more popular back then when the internet had about 20 pages in total. The entire scale of the web has been growing x-fold every year.

So what was relatively relevant back then is now irrelevant to a general audience and as a result has been pushed back. You could argue Google should bias search much more towards individual history but that has its own pitfalls, both in terms of results and privacy wise.

Basically blame your fellow searchers for clicking and wanting big brand stuff, Google just gives you what the internet considers relevant.

[Jochim]

I blame Google and the third party ad model for profiting from and encouraging the creation of the lowest quality cash grabs. Search for any kind of product review and you're faced with a sea of auto-generated shit, the only purpose of which is to serve you an ad and hope you click an amazon affiliate link. It's a prime example that the "value" delivered isn't value to society or the individuals using the service.

[eitland]

Can't be the whole explanation for why you cannot find them with Google anymore: search.marginalia.nu manages to find the

[marginalia_nu]

To be fair Marginalia Search is very much not a general-purpose search engine.

If I was trying to cater to a broader set of use cases and users, I'd probably have more of Google's problems as a result.