I truly don't get Google's move.

I'm sure the model is fine, but it's not Google Search, and when I want Search I want Search. If I wanted to ask an AI, why can't I ask the one from my subscription... that I'm already paying for... that's actually good... that can also search the web?

I assume it's a play to test the waters for how the ad market is going to work, because as a product I really can't see why I would ever use it. Dropbox comment moment incoming?

• mrdependable

  today at 5:58 PM

  They want to capture more of the value that was previously going to others. That's basically what this has all been leading to. Why let a cooking website get visitors and ad revenue when they are free to take the content and show it as their own? Now they are going to do the same to e-commerce. Either they are going to let customers buy their products through Google's interface, or they won't be discovered. No more ownership of the customer relationship. Stores will be a backend warehouse and manufacturer now with Google taking a percentage of all profits.

  • eithed

    today at 6:19 PM

    > Why let a cooking website get visitors and ad revenue when they are free to take the content and show it as their own?

    I think this is a step beyond that - why should people be creating cooking websites when you can ask LLM how to cook given thing.

  • jeltz

    today at 6:13 PM

    It is the same thing as when they pushed for AMP. They wanted to prevent traffic from leaving google.com then too.

  • strifey

    today at 6:10 PM

    This has been their MO with their search for a decade+ now. "Native" results hiding actual search results below the fold killed many 2010s era websites that relied on search traffic.

  • georgeecollins

    today at 6:05 PM

    Exactly! They also have been letting the results of google search get seriously degraded by ads. Would many people prefer AI over google search circa 2010?

    They killed their competition and now they will give you the product that gives them the most money.

• osigurdson

  today at 6:16 PM

  I don't see search and AI as fundamentally distinct things. Usually I just want an answer.

  • ttctciyf

    today at 6:18 PM

    If you don't care about the facticity of the answer, AI is less clicks, granted.

• mrweasel

  today at 5:23 PM

  > I truly don't get Google's move.

  Users aren't adopting their AI at the rate shareholders expect, so they now force the adoption at the cost of search.

  • Legend2440

    today at 5:38 PM

    According to Google, users are adopting it. They say AI mode is the most popular feature they've ever introduced, and is driving an increase in total search queries.

    >Just one year after its debut, AI Mode has surpassed one billion monthly users, with queries more than doubling every quarter since launch. As people have realized just how much more Search can do for them, they’re searching more than ever before — so much so that last quarter, we saw queries reach an all-time high.

    >Another place where we’ve been rapidly innovating is in the Gemini app. Last year at I/O, the Gemini app had 400 million monthly active users. Today, we’ve surpassed 900 million, more than doubling in a year. In that same time, daily requests have grown over seven times.

    • mrweasel

      today at 6:01 PM

      While I'm not opposed to the idea that Google AI mode is so good that people use it more, I also feel like the average person only have so many queries per day. Google statement would indicate that people had a number of queries that they just opted to ignore, because find the answers was to cumbersome.

      I'm not entirely sure I'm buying that, unless users keep prompting the AI to reduce the amount of reading they need to do. Sort of interrogating the AI, rather than reading a Wikipedia page.

      • dandanua

        today at 6:15 PM

        The fact that users are using more search queries means they can't find what they want with a lesser number of queries. It seems that Google's PR team doesn't have an incentive to understand that, or thinks that everyone else is stupid.

    • autoexec

      today at 5:58 PM

      > They say AI mode is the most popular feature they've ever introduced, and is driving an increase in total search queries.

      Technically, all the people who google "how do I disable this shitty AI mode in google" would count as "driving an increase in total search queries."

      An easy way to make a feature popular is to force it on everyone. Then you can pat yourself on the back when 100% of your users are using it!

      • baggachipz

        today at 6:20 PM

        I remember when Internet Explorer was the most used browser. The fact that people were just using it to download Chrome doesn't matter to stats.

    • gazebo2

      today at 5:50 PM

      I mean, "AI Mode" is the default result when you Google something, so of course they're seeing high usage. Driving an increase in total queries is probably because instead of just Googling something and getting the right results like it was 10~ years ago, now you have to interrogate a chatbot or try multiple queries. I would think higher total queries is more an indicator that your search function isn't effective.

      • SirFatty

        today at 5:58 PM

        "I mean, "AI Mode" is the default result when you Google something"

        No, it's not. AI mode is something you have to select (in the search window). There is an AI overview provided with your basic search results.

      • khimaros

        today at 6:12 PM

        this has not been my experience on desktop or Android. did you opt into something? are you accessing via browser search or Google.com?

      • esseph

        today at 6:03 PM

        > Driving an increase in total queries is probably because instead of just Googling something and getting the right results like it was 10~ years ago, now you have to interrogate a chatbot or try multiple queries. I would think higher total queries is more an indicator that your search function isn't effective.

        I wonder how much the search results thing is related to language and locality. I have a hunch but I haven't really dug into it.

        I live in the US, I speak English, and my browser is normally chrome.

        The number of times I've gone to the 2nd page in Google search results you can probably count on one hand in the last 15yr or so.

        I use the standard Google search things when I want specifics... Using quotes, site:news.ycombinator.com to search a site, or add a "-" to remove results from that site. I use a "+" when needed. Nothing fancy.

        When people say they can't find things in Google search, I'm genuinely baffled. I have a strong suspicion that it has something to do with the combination of browser, locality, and language. Why? Could be tons of reasons for that, some probably anti-competitive on the browser side.

        I have tried to use ecosia, start page, duckduckgo, etc. Was never happy with those results and always ended up back at Google search.

        I just want to know what's different, you know? I look up some pretty obscure stuff sometimes.

        Note: I do normally have my Google account logged in in the browser when doing search, however I have search personalization and history turned off, so that should not be influencing the quality of my search results compared to whatever "baseline" is.

• nomel

  today at 6:07 PM

  My read on it is "AI is taking over internet content generation, and we can't filter because we'll end up filtering everything that makes us the most money"

• pupppet

  today at 6:04 PM

  They see AI killing the incentive for anyone to produce human-generated content so they're squeezing the last few bucks out of the internet as we know it before it finally goes belly-up.

• BiraIgnacio

  today at 5:39 PM

  Well, if the marketing teams are being told to reach people using AI or something like that, then Google is just playing to their real customers.

• dandanua

  today at 6:03 PM

  The intention is to kill the web in its current form, obviously. If only 1/3 of their users have left, then it is still a win for them in the long run, as they will gain the fraction of content they directly supply to users. Singularity is here and it's spreading faster than a cancer.

• shevy-java

  today at 5:54 PM

  > I truly don't get Google's move.

  Because Google wants to kill off its search engine here. It is very clear.

  > I assume it's a play to test the waters for how the ad market is going to work, because as a product I really can't see why I would ever use it. Dropbox comment moment incoming?

  This assumes that Google search is still a high priority for Google. With their privatized adNetwork, they are trying to get people to trust them, and abuse users via their ads. That is their business model. Google is an adCompany. It stopped being a tech company many years ago already.

  Also they control the adMarket for the most part. Just look at youtube.

• micromacrofoot

  today at 5:57 PM

  they ruined search a while ago and they want to stop the bleeding

• jeffwask

  today at 5:30 PM

  > it's not Google Search

  ...and it really hasn't been for a good number of years now. I left a while ago when results were all SEO copy pasta blogs this is just a final nail in the coffin.

I actually like AI mode in Google. My main reason is if I just have a quick question it seems a lot quicker than logging into ChatGPT/Claude as I can just type it in the address bar.

Of course DDG / others can do the exact same thing as they already have an AI mode. Maybe you can even set up ChatGPT as a search engine - not sure. The key for this use case is speed - it has to be nearly instant.

• gchamonlive

  today at 5:43 PM

  Kagi does this really nicely, you just add a question mark at the end and it'll add on top of the search results an LLM summary of what's been found. It's subpar in quality but more than enough to aggregate the results by theme

• nemomarx

  today at 5:39 PM

  If you could use something like a ddg bang for it? like !chat at the end of the search and it goes to some router?

My friends who previously had no interest in technology and never talked about it, are suddenly following tech news closely all because they hate AI being pushed so hard. One was just messaging me this morning about alternatives to Google search and maps. He ended up downloading DuckDuckGo.

If Google isn’t carefully they’re going to push people away from their golden goose.

• patates

  today at 5:45 PM

  > My friends who previously had no interest in technology and never talked about it, are suddenly following tech news closely all because they hate AI being pushed so hard.

  My friends who previously had no interest in technology and never talked about it, are suddenly following tech news closely all because they have fear of missing out on AI :(

  • thewebguyd

    today at 5:54 PM

    > because they have fear of missing out on AI

    That's been my experience too, both with friends and coworkers.

    It would seem that the negative sentiment around AI is largely an internet phenomenon. I've yet to run into a hardcore "AI skeptic" irl. People seem either neutral, or enthusiastic about it.

    • andersonpico

      today at 6:18 PM

      I've yet to meet anyone outside that likes AI except for manager or when people are pretending for their bosses at work. It became a survival tactic.

    • pesus

      today at 6:02 PM

      Meanwhile I've never run into anyone who actually likes AI in any form (except for my boss). Most people who dislike it aren't bringing it up at random. I'm sure it has to do with the circles you interact with and their demographics.

• dylan604

  today at 5:23 PM

  Search is not the golden goose. Ads are. If search was the golden goose, they wouldn't be trying so hard to replace it with AI.

  Just because Google used to do search as their main point of business does not mean that holds true today. Holding on to the false premise will only add to your confusion about their decisions.

  • al_borland

    today at 5:53 PM

    Ads in Search make up a significant percentage of their revenue. It is also the gateway that gets people into the Google ecosystem.

    Ads make the money, but Search is still the consumer facing product that brings people to Google and keeps them there. It’s so ubiquitous people don’t even think about it or notice it anymore.

    I’m always surprised by how much people are still searching for stuff as we’ve moved from the open web to various platforms (Amazon, TikTok, Facebook, etc), but every time I see Google’s revenue breakdown I’m shocked by just how important Search still is to their business.

    This is from 2024, but shows Search accounting for nearly 57% of revenue. Yes, this is made possible by the AdWords business, but without Search, that 57% goes away, unless that traffic goes to a 3rd party that is also using AdWords and Google were to make the same from 3rd party ads as 1st party. I find that doubtful.

    https://www.doofinder.com/en/statistics/google-revenue-break...

  • autoexec

    today at 6:03 PM

    The main reason Google loved search was because it was the primary way they got your personal info. Now Chrome gives Googles your entire browsing history, Gmail lets them read your email, youtube tells them what you're interested in, android gives google your entire life offline and suddenly the only thing google search is good for is as just one more website pushing google ads.

    AI is going to be great at pushing ads. Plus AI trains you to give google even more control. Instead of just presenting you with a list of websites offering different perspectives and opinions on something, Google can just tell you what they want you to know/think (or not tell you anything they'd rather you not know/think about). The more you get used to treating google like an oracle instead of a librarian the easier it will be to manipulate you.

  • jeffwask

    today at 5:31 PM

    They only dominate Ads because they dominate search if everyone leaves Search the ad business grinds to a halt as well. These are the ying and yang of Google.

    • dylan604

      today at 5:36 PM

      Kind of. They dominate ads because the dominated search when they bought the successful ads company. By that point in time, they already had your profile built, and the further use of search just continues to enhance that profile. But now that ads has its own persistent tracking that dependence on search is not as strong as it used to be

      • jeffwask

        today at 5:46 PM

        People have reported a decrease in ROI from spending on Google ads already when they no longer control all the eyes and where you rank in what those eyes see when they search, that ROI will drop even more. People will stop paying for Google ads when the ROI is higher on other platforms.

        Couple that with the fact that a lot of folks have moved their search to GPT or Claude once those platforms start taking in ad money... that budget will come from somewhere and that's likely existing Google ad buy dollars shifting.

• sourcecodeplz

  today at 6:01 PM

  I think this is very true. They probably got scared of the almost 1b weekly active users of ChatGPT, and how people would rather ask ChatGPT than use Google. It will be a balance but this is a great opportunity for smaller search engines to make a real comeback.

> Just for a start, visits to its AI-free search page noai.duckduckgo.com between May 20 to May 25 are said to have increased by 22.7% on average week-on-week, with the figures peaking May 24 at 27.7%.

> The DuckDuckGo mobile app saw installs spike in the US by 18.1% on average compared to the previous week. TechCrunch reported this growth was sustained over six days, peaking at 30.5% on May 25. An even greater number of iOS users hit download on the app though, with installs seeing an average week-on-week growth of 33% and a peak of 69.9%.

Why do they report only relative numbers? These numbers alone are meaningless. This is just lazy reporting.

• bee_rider

  today at 5:16 PM

  They wanted to write a story where this was a negative consequence for Google, I suspect, but the absolute numbers wouldn’t have supported that (they mention that it is inconsequential to Google a couple paragraphs in, if your browser can sustain the site for that long. Mine had trouble).

• mossTechnician

  today at 5:22 PM

  noai.duckduckgo.com probably receives much less traffic than the main domain, which enjoys placement in many prominent browsers (and offers AI overviews by default, although they are far smaller and less likely to appear than on Google). It would be much more interesting to see absolute numbers... in the context of the main site.

• phillipcarter

  today at 5:46 PM

  ...because the absolute numbers are incredibly low. And I say this as a fan of DDG! It's just the reality we live in; those who are negatively polarized against AI enough to make this sort of change are just very small in number.

I direct a lot of questions to LLMs, but I want to ask a high-quality model, not the crappy one that Google uses to answer queries. If I'm typing something into Google, it's because I want a search result, not an LLM answer.

• SubiculumCode

  today at 6:09 PM

  I do have to say, and this is from recent observations, not outdated ones, but their AI summaries get things wrong, alot, and these are things that gemini (proper), Claude, or ChatGPT subscription AI's get wrong.

• xmprt

  today at 5:49 PM

  I've actually changed that. When I type something into Google it's because I want an LLM answer - their search results have been useless for a while now. But that's only because I rarely use Google these days. I'm mostly using DDG to search (I might try Kagi at some point). Google is relegated to my phone when I want a quick answer where accuracy isn't critical without needing to scroll through a bunch of search results/open and read websites on a small screen.

  • ruszki

    today at 6:10 PM

    Kagi, unfortunately, is getting worse too. I think mainly because they don’t get access. But I’m not sure. I had to fallback more and more to Google, because Kagi couldn’t find exact matches, while Google could. Like texts which I copied from a webpage (for example from Android’s source), and it can’t find it.

    Its search results ordering is quite good, but the accessible information for them seems to be shrinking. And quickly.

    I’m at the point where I don’t search for complex things anymore. I use Kagi for things which can be found with any search engines. Not because I chose it, but because I was forced. This was not the case a few years back, when I started to use it.

    Btw, there was one thing with which Google was superior all along: define <word>. And they fucking killed it in the past months, for a far, far worse solution. Nothing comes even close.

• deltoidmaximus

  today at 5:51 PM

  If I'm typing something into a google it's usually so I can be hit with a Captcha on my home internet connection and then get search results that aren't even any better than DDG. And DDG has a LLM as well.

  • pesus

    today at 6:00 PM

    You've got the captcha issue as well? Seems like it's happening constantly now. I suspect Apple Private Relay has something to do with it, but I'm not sure.

    • floxy

      today at 6:07 PM

      Nope, not exclusively an Apple thing, since I don't use any Apple products at home, and have had an uptick in captcha requests.

If I want AI, I'll use AI. If I want Search, I want Search. Give me the option. Then again I switched to DDG like, last year.

It's been my default search for years. Lately for quick one shot AI prompts I use duck.ai (they put some basic effort into anonymizing your chat: https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/duckai/ai-chat-... ).

For the search, some of the local results are wrong but I live in a very small area so it may be more reliable for highly populated areas. Lately I've been checking out Kagi for a few things just to see what the quality is like on competition. The anonymized chat (proxy) for AI is cool but very small context limit. Good for looking up random questions and they typically include references.

The world seems to be fragmenting, into those that see the value in the latest from Google, and those that resist changes like this. I search for how much oil does my <ICE vehicle> take" and get the exact answer in a single sentence, or I suppose I could click the links and wade through all the validation for choosing <ICE vehicle> and how often one should change the oil, and which brand of oil that blog is pushing etc etc.

I love Google's AI answers and their AI Mode tab. DDG is just Bing or a search vendor proxy, so I've never understood the fascination. At least Perplexity is different to Google. DDG seeing a 28% increase is like Google saying they saw a drop of 0.0000000001% in traffic.

HN crowd forget that the world isn't like us, they didn't grow up with Yahoo and Alta Vista, with Excite etc etc. Our SOP is to resist all change, anytime Apple brings out a new version it'll be the end of Apple according to HN - Apple - the biggest company in the world - what do they know about UI, "Liquid Glass sucks!" :) :)

We're a community in danger of pushing out those new to the tech world, recent graduates will be made to feel unwelcome if we continue to trash everything that the biggest companies in the world do, like we always know better. I implore the community to be more positive about the future, about the technologies that will take us into that future.

• pesus

  today at 6:05 PM

  Being critical about AI companies isn't what's pushing new people away from the tech world. The AI companies and the consequences of their actions are, as well as comments like this pretending the issues don't exist and that we need to just be positive about the "future".

  And supposing these technologies do take us into the future: when said future is bleak and worse in most ways than what came before, people aren't going to be encouraged or enthusiastic about the tech world.

• SoftTalker

  today at 5:37 PM

  I like having a direct answer to my question "how much oil does my engine take" but as of today I do not trust the answer to be correct, so I still cross check several sources, ideally ones that appear to be authoritative.

  • dualvariable

    today at 5:46 PM

    I asked claude to dig up the current Ford Bulletin for the engine in my truck to tell me the recommended motor oil. And it found the updated recommendations properly. I wouldn't trust google AI because I know specifically that the recommendations changed, and I don't want whatever the published specs were when the engine was first manufactured, which is out of date (and found on lots of low quality blogs). I don't even trust claude, but it gave me the URL to click on to verify and summarized it well enough that I mostly trusted that it wasn't using the cited technical bulletin and not a bunch of random AI-slop web pages.

    • ryandrake

      today at 6:01 PM

      I wouldn't trust any 'confident stochastic next-word predictor' to tell me fact. There are official sources of information for these kinds of car maintenance questions.

      • SoftTalker

        today at 6:11 PM

        [dead]

Yeah, starting from a much lower baseline than DDG, I've had something like a 10x increase in queries last ~week. Seems like a lot of people are looking for alternatives.

For as much as how the startup space loves to pay lip service to contrarian bets, people sure do all be running in the same direction.

I switched away from Google to Duck a few years back. But I observed that I mostly do !g and end up on Google. I read similar comments from many others on other threads.

Recently I switched to Kagi and has been a very happy customer. I never visited Google after that. Only downside is the Search on mobile. You have to install an app and enable it as extension on safari. Logging in never worked and couldn't enable my premium Kagi on iPhone.

• metalliqaz

  today at 6:01 PM

  Google is better than Duck's backend (Bing or Yahoo, IIRC)

  However, I find that most of my queries don't require Google to find the result. Maybe once every couple days I do a search, don't like the results, and then add a "!g". Most of the time it's fine and I get to avoid Google's ecosystem.

  • specproc

    today at 6:09 PM

    Yeah, same. Switched my default to Duck about a year back although I've still got Google on mobile (something I only just clocked as I type).

    Google search had degraded so badly pre-AI, I was already finding it equivalent for most things. The odd few searches benefit from Google, but nowhere near enough to warrant them as a default.

I dislike the AI summaries always popping up. I do now see an AI mode button. But so far I am not forced into AI mode. Is this happening for other people?

• runjake

  today at 6:10 PM

  Append "udm=14" to your Google searches to make this stuff go away (for now, until Google removes it).

  You can add a custom search engine to your browser with something like:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=%s&udm=14
  

  Sometimes that will glitch out on Chromium browsers. If so, try this variant:

    {google:baseURL}search?q=%s&udm=14

From my experience the Google AI mode is more restrictive on what it will let you search for and the content it produces.

I personally have had to use DuckDuckGo to search for things that Gemini finds to be against its instructions to answer.

And I'm not talking about things that are NSFW, but some things that Gemini just doesn't want to discuss.

That's kinda Gemini's problem in general, it just is overly restrictive and doesn't like to talk about anything things that Claude will freely talk about and push against and discuss with you.

• rvnx

  today at 4:47 PM

  You are absolutely right, DuckDuckGo is better for porn than Google, but if you want even better results you can use Yandex.

  For other things, Grok is quite fast — Perplexity too

It's the french open. There's always been a bug with google search where sometimes I have to search 'french open' or 'australian open' twice to get it to give me the google scores. That bug still exists, sometimes it just brings up the site, but now it will also sometimes just go into AI mode and it will refuse to get out of it. Like even when you click for otherwise, it will force its way back.

The google live scores is a great feature. But when it's not coming up, even googling "french open google live scores" doesn't just bring it up every single time. It might if you try, but try multiple times over the day...

AI Mode is pretty good. It's quite reliable and much faster than any LLM chatbot.

AI Overviews are pretty bad though.

I've been going back and forth between DDG and Google. I have DDG set as default and only use Google if DDG isn't giving me good results.

• teejmya

  today at 5:06 PM

  Same. If I need to Google it, I add "!g" to the search terms.

  https://duckduckgo.com/bangs

  • floralhangnail

    today at 5:28 PM

    I use !s for my fallback. I usually don't need the !g unless I want to see CAPTCHAS.

  • NDlurker

    today at 5:17 PM

    Thanks for the tip; I didn't know about that.

• notepad0x90

  today at 5:09 PM

  !g is the best of both worlds.

I'm not sure why people go with DuckDuckGo as their engine as it's just trading Google for Bing. After learning about their deal with Microsoft, I started using Brave Search instead.

• dawnerd

  today at 5:57 PM

  It's also pretty ironic for people to ditch Google over ai just to move to another search engine that has AI by default unless you happen to know about the noai subdomain. But it is good that people are willing to break the habit and try alternatives. That's what Google should be scared of.

• fckgw

  today at 5:57 PM

  Because they want something they know that resembles the old Google Search which DDG provides.

I switched to DDG about a year ago and it works fine for me. For some queries, Google still surfaces better results, but DDG is good enough that I don't really miss it.

The only Google service I haven't been able to replace is YouTube - no real alternative. I still use Google Maps as well, but could probably switch to Apple maps without missing much. For hiking trails, Apple Maps has often been superior. I briefly tried OpenStreetMaps years ago, but the lack of traffic data and the fact that it gave me bad directions made it untenable.

There have been a few times where I found Google's AI mode useful. But most of the time I just want regular search results.

I'm among the people who finally moved to DuckDuckGo as my default. And for the occasional time when I want some AI mode I know how to get to Google.

I'm seeing the same increased activity around my search engine project (https://github.com/asciimoo/hister). While Google's decision is very controversial, it's good to see that people are seeking for alternatives - nice motivation boost to keep developing alternative search projects.

Both can be true. A small number dropping off could be a big boost for DDG.

> 28% more visits

So, from 3 to 4 people?

If you want to use DDG then go for it. Let people enjoy things, I say. But let's not pretend DDG is suddenly surging, or even relevant really. It's a niche service largely for virtue-signaling by people who insist that "Google sucks". That's their core demographic.

Some Googling claims DDG gets 145M searches per day and claims Google gets ~14B. Well, 14B translates to ~162k QPS. I know for a fact that Google's traffic is significantly higher than that so I'm not sure where that claim comes from.

I honeslty don't believe a significant percentage of Google users even know Sundar made a statement about people loving AI mode or would even care, one way or the other. This is just more marketing fluff trying to will DDG growth into existence.

Scrolling that page felt like getting groped and robbed at the same time. So I much flickering, motion, and distraction. And that with adblock on.

Feels like google is purposely downgrading non-AI search results

• bell-cot

  today at 5:48 PM

  They were doing that long before they offered "AI" search results.

I moved from ddg to Google ai. I find it really awesome

... DDG had .7% marketshare (https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share). 28% more visits would take it to .84%. Assuming those all come from Google, that would mean .16% of Google users didn't love AI mode enough to switch.

Classic example of misleading with stats.

• hansmayer

  today at 5:55 PM

  Well... it is still a huge relative increase. And who knows where it could lead them, if they can sustain that sort of growth on a weekly basis...compounding and all...

• onlyrealcuzzo

  today at 5:54 PM

  DDG is probably regularly growing at ~20%+ anyway...

I'll have to see Google's stats as well. I went the other way leaving DDG for google AI mode. I use ddg still if I just want it to find a site. if I want answers, I use Google.

I would say it's more than visits that count, how many people are staying in the DDG or Google home page doing things? a lot more with Google I'd think. they've succeeded in trapping me in their product, instead of navigating away, and I'm happier for it. And... i still don't get what people's problem is (quality wise that is), you don't have to use AI results right, and it's pretty obvious what the AI interaction portion of the page is? I'm sure ad blocker extensions can remove it entirely as well. DDG's quality is not just lower, it requires me clicking around to get AI assisted summary.

I just don't get it, is people's time not valuable? even if half the time the AI results are wrong, it offsets (for me - and it's more like 5%) the time I waste clicking on random sites, some of them ad-trodden (where a blocker isn't available), outdated,etc.. and I usually don't even go to the second page of the result where as the AI reviews more than the first page or two to give me a summary. I'm saving lots and lots of time, getting more done with it.

This is tech, not religion, but it feels like people are conflating the two. it's just a tool that's used to search things.

What is the source of these numbers? Where is the DDG statement posted? Techcrunch? Thurrot? Links to links to links to nothing

As someone who has been driving DDG for the past 6 years, i have switched to Google back due to the new AI mode,, its such a nice quick way to check information and validate ideas.. no friction included.

I am trying to find a replacement for google search.

DuckDuckGo was also useless. Qwant just copy/pastes Google's awful UI.

We kind of see that all search engines suck now, but in many cases there is no real reason why that should be the case. For instance, why did Qwant copy/paste Google's horrible UI? There is no logical reason for this other than trying to bait in people who like the Google search UI. I don't like that UI Google chose since like 10 years or more; Google ruined its search engine already way before AI.

We really need a search engine that works and isn't control by a greedy, Evil adCompany. DDG isn't the answer; neither is Qwant.

maybe AI agents prefer duckduckgo?

0.1% to 0.128% is 28% as well

The problem with DDG is they don't have their own infra like brave and rely so much on bing...

DuckDuckGo have to change their brand name if they want non-technical people to take them seriously

• Hugsbox

  today at 5:25 PM

  This has been my issue with DuckDuckGo from the start... it needs to be something a little more catchy and that rolls off the tongue. Saying "I'll DuckDuckGo it" feels so clunky. As small of a gripe as it sounds like, it really does matter.

  • yegg

    today at 5:40 PM

    Duck it.

• clownpenis_fart

  today at 5:17 PM

  [dead]

New Google -> perfect example of en$hi++ification.

• hightrix

  today at 5:40 PM

  Google is the OG of enshittification. When DoubleClick bought Google, I mean when Google bought DoubleClick, that is when Google started printing money in exchange for a terrible user experience.

Both statements can be true, you know.

Some people can love AI mode while others hate it.

• huflungdung

  today at 4:57 PM

  [dead]

AI mode isn't that terrible.

[flagged]

Obligatory “I use Kagi” comment since I didn’t see any. /s

But seriously… Kagi is awesome!

[dead]

"Google’s AI Overviews Don't Have an Off Switch. 4 Tricks to Return to Traditional Web Results" - https://www.pcmag.com/explainers/googles-ai-overviews-dont-h...

• john_strinlai

  today at 5:08 PM

  they dont even recommend using a different search engine? shame on them.

  why bother fiddling with url parameters or switching entire browsers when you can just go to one of many other search sites?

  this is just an ad for brave being disguised as something 'helpful'.

• notepad0x90

  today at 5:08 PM

  are you a bot?

  Why do you need an off switch, are your eyes and fingers not able too coordinate scrolling down past the already half collapsed ai overview section? does it offend you at a spiritual level to see it?

  • root-parent

    today at 6:19 PM

    As a bot yes...it offends me terribly, at a deep sigmoidic spiritual level...