[jraph]

Privacy aside if it's done server side, I think this crosses another dangerous line.

With this, Google controls how content you read is summarized, they could introduce biases, intentionally or not, and I'm not sure we should trust such an actor for this.

[hamasho]

It may be summarized to what they want, but it can be what I want too. All YouTube recommendations are already what I want to see. Videos from creators who share my world view, criticizing what I hate, and praising what I've already liked. If this Chrome's new feature is also personalized in this manner, I can read articles against my view and still get only what I want. My world view will become increasingly polarized, and it's already quite biased.

[Drakim]

When I try to search up a topic on YouTube, the list of search results eventually STOP showing videos matching my criteria and instead show 10 videos in a row labeled "People also watched" that is unrelated to my search.

It's one thing to get recommendations in a place where recommendations are appropriate, and the dangers of the feedback loop you are talking about. It's another thing entirely to actively push it in other contexts.

"I know you are searching for programming topics, but might you be interested in this political outrage instead?"

[rchaud]

What you're describing is a common UX dark pattern. The system must never show blank space in the UI for a search result, lest it drive them into the arms of a competitor.

We can thank Netflix for starting the trend of "we don't have this, but how about this other thing that we do have?"

[fooofw]

I'm not sure that fully explains it here. I see more relevant search results below the "People also watched" section (just checked now). Further down, there is also "For you" and "Previously watched" which have videos of no discernible relevance to the query and these are also followed by again more relevant search results.

[mrguyorama]

No, youtube will cut off your search results early to show you videos it think will engage you more regardless of how many search results there actually are.

Google does not give a fuck what you think you want, because they know better than you

[andsoitis]

> results eventually STOP showing videos matching my criteria

How long is that typical list? How often do you pick the things at the bottom of that list vs the results near the top?

[everdrive]

I pick things from the bottom of the list a lot. I really hate when engineers try to guess what I want. I already know what I want. These “automatic” products are terrible.

[andsoitis]

What do you think is a good list length? One can assume search results are practically infinite, so you have to make a decision of where to stop. What would your heuristic / algorithm be for determining the termination point?

[JohnFen]

> One can assume search results are practically infinite

I don't think that can be assumed at all, actually. At least, it sure doesn't look that way when I search for most things, on YouTube or elsewhere. Most of them run out of relevant results pretty quickly and then start including obviously irrelevant results.

[everdrive]

A list of every video where my terms show up somewhere in the title or description.

[Drakim]

I did a test, searching for a pop song. I got 9 results for that pop song and then the "People also watched" section comes up. After 4 results with a +6 more button, it goes back to my pop song results.

[skybrian]

The trick to get rid of that is to go to search filters and select "videos."

[fauigerzigerk]

I was ahead of my time 30 years ago when I achieved the exact same result by simply buying the right newspaper.

And if I wanted to find more in depth material to support my firmly held beliefs I just had to go to the right bookstore.

[jraph]

Well, I'm not quite at ease with trusting a third party to try to guess my (ever changing?) world view.

How do you know it works well? How do you know it misses nothing? How do you know it's not subtly biased (intentionally or not) in a way you would not notice, or you would think it's good enough?

> I can read articles against my view and still get only what I want. My world view will become increasingly polarized, and it's already quite biased.

Yes, of course we all do, but it's another thing to involve a third party in this process.

[everdrive]

>All YouTube recommendations are already what I want to see

I wish I had your experience. My YouTube recommendations can definitely be said to be “my fault” in some sense of the word, but wherever the blame lies they’re still mostly terrible. YouTube will watch me skip a video for a whole week, but keep showing it to me “just in case.” I’d rather it were just a dumb search at this point.

[JohnFen]

> All YouTube recommendations are already what I want to see.

I might feel more kindly toward YouTube recommendations if they did this for me.

[paganel]

With the new Shorts feature the YT has gotten so bad that it isn’t even funny anymore. I wonder if anyone there is using their product.

[izacus]

Google has always introduced biases by virtue of ranking your results and deciding which content to surface.

This was always the case.

[elliotec]

And this is worse.

[jklinger410]

It's hard to make a search engine. Any decision they make will create bias and shape the entire web.

[throwaw12]

don't worry, it gets shutdown in 2 years

[hightrix]

They will shove ads in it eventually and then it’ll become core to search.

[px43]

I currently use the "summarize everything" extension for this. It lets you tweak your system prompt if you want to, but the defaults are pretty good. It's just another tool. Use it or don't, but it's saved me countless amounts of time digging through overly verbose prose looking for the interesting bits of information.

[andrewfurey2003]

Solution: dont use google.

[jraph]

Of course I can, and do, avoid Google.

That's an individual solution. I'm interested in a world that's as good as possible not only for me, but for the other people too. Most people around still use Google. They might find this new feature useful and start using it, and possibly suffer this bias. Not only they may get manipulated individually, but it can have broader consequences, even to those avoiding the feature. If Facebook can influence which president get elected in a country, it will also affect people avoiding facebook (sometime for this very reason).

Avoiding stuff for oneself is a first step but it's hardly a solution, these big corporations have a non negligible effect on the world, still with you as a member.

We'll have to start to raise awareness around these things, in addition to all the subjects on which we already need awareness.

But same old same old I guess, Google already puts you in a bubble, just even more concerning I guess. It was manipulating us, now it's another, new, potential manipulation angle.

[imiric]

I share your frustration, but it's hard not to be pessimistic about this. Regular internet users will flock to these tools, just like they flock to social media, even though it's a clear detriment to our personal and collective well being.

If the Snowden revelations did anything is to show that people ultimately don't care about being exploited, as long as they can continue to enjoy technology. Trading convenience for privacy is not something most people would even consider.

Things will quickly spiral out of control once everyone has their personal AI assistant, that is controlled by a major corporation with government ties. It's the wet dream of any aspiring autocrat, and we're building that future.

Here we are, on a tech forum among people who work at these companies, and all we can do is type at the void. These companies continue to build products that on the surface seem enticing and useful, which is surely how they also pitch it internally so engineers that build it have a clear conscience, yet lead us to a further breakdown of society in ways we haven't imagined yet.

I'm not sure if all this is over the top, doom and gloom thinking on my part, but it feels frustrating to be part of this industry, seeing how it's tearing apart society, and having the concerns ignored and dismissed by both users and companies alike.

[jraph]

> but it feels frustrating to be part of this industry

There are places in this industry that are not so bad. Of course it has drawbacks and require effort, but you can get paid for doing things that align (as best as possible) with your values.

[gumballindie]

Seems like that's the direction things are moving. Google's becoming heavily enshitified.

[mrd3v0]

Becoming? I beg your pardon?

Their entire business was built on this. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisit...

I know this is HN and all, but to wait all of these years of acquisitions, poaching, project terminations, Chrome shenanigans to destroy the internet, main product "SEO" degradation and literally every single sign of enshittification...Google has always been one of the prime examples of enshittification. That's why they are very successful at making money.

[eastbound]

They already show heavily curated content, with a conscious and intentional bias into presenting, for example, groups in a light that doesn’t match reality.

You won’t find info about any merely “controversial” idea on Google, it’s all censored, it’s all disinformation already. Try even finding memes, you generally won’t find them. Try finding info that doesn’t paint some politicians in a good light, you won’t find it, even though it exists with the exact keywords you type in and the crawler returns a success for that page.

So what do you mean, while you already trust Google to give its bias to the current world?

[andsoitis]

What’s a good example that I can Google for but won’t find results (censored) or where only one side is presented?

I will Google it and report back…

[wredue]

Yeah. You gotta be searching for some real bonkers shit to have google not show it up.

The most completely batshit insane groups I’m willing to google anymore are flat earthers, young earth creationists, and Facebook mom groups, and google happily indexes and returns favourable results for all of these.

Even looking at off the deep end alt-right content like men’s rights, red pilled, trucker convoy, anti-masker, Tate, etc, google has zero issues return favourable results for all of them in a private window.

Really begs the question of just what level of illegal shit this dude is trying to get google to return.

[carlosjobim]

Classic hacker discourse...

1. Bunch all people who disagree with you into one and claim they are some kind of group. Bonus for listing 12 or more "groups".

2. Raise suspicion about the user you're replying to. Maybe they belong to one of those people you just listed? Maybe they are a terrorist? Maybe they voted for the wrong guy? Should we call the police? Of course we should! He's even trying to make Google show "bonkers shit, bat shit and illegal shit".

No matter how hard you try to follow the line, one day you will find yourself in one of those groups who people like yourself try to bunch together, and be exposed to the same level of suspicion and hatred that you yourself are unloading in your comment.

[wredue]

People who make suspicious, dubious claims deserve to have their claims called out.

I am not going to give up on calling out this purposefully vague, bullshit commentary just because you dislike it. If you don’t like having your sides bullshit being called out, don’t post it.

It’s actually hilarious how eerily similar your group is.

>oh woe as us, we’re such big victims

Someone responds shutting it down

>why do you have to call out the posts. Can’t you just not respond

Every single time like clock work. It’s like you guys all belong to a forum of AI generated comments and responses and you just copy and paste them.

[carlosjobim]

I don't think anybody is interested in giving you an example, because they expect that it will get them banned from HN, or at least have their comment flagged and removed by activists.

Google does censor content, and they are kind enough to inform the owner of a website by e-mail when they have censored the content from their search results, so it is a fact that is just undeniable.

[andsoitis]

What a nice escape hatch. I can't give you and example because I will be banned if I do, ergo there are cases that will get me banned. Not QED.

[Rebelgecko]

On the bright side, if it's fine serverside I wonder if it'll bypass paywalls?

[GhostWhisperer]

it's ok, they already read your email