• Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you say you'd pay for a search engine. Oof. Guys we used to just link useful things at the end of our blog posts and on our myspace pages. Then search engines came in and we didn't have to. Then they killed the SEO placement of blogs. Now you can't find anything useful unless you try their AI. The whole business model is convincing us we need them while they make the internet less efficient to scroll through.

      • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I understand why you would pay and can respect it. But access to an organized and searchable internet is something closer to a right than a privilege, in my mind.

        • Steeve@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There were a ton of search engines in the 90s around the same time Geocities was released. AskJeeves was probably the most popular, but there was Altavista, Lycos, Dogpile, Yahoo… Shit, Google came out in 97, which was only a few years after Geocities.

          • Senuf@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            When I had my Geocities website, I used Webcrawler as my preferred search engine. Cute spider and spiderweb iso/logo. Then came Altavista (altavista.digital.com, it was at first) and I switched. It brought more and better results. Somehow I never liked Lycos. And Yahoo, the first years, was a categorised catalogue/guide, kinda curated, and you had to submit a site to be considered to be added. You had to choose under which category (and subcategory, quite often) it should be listed. Also, at first, it wasn't Yahoo.com, it was buried in some .edu (or .ac, I don't quite recall) URL.

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You just dated the hell out of yourself, but also showed how young you are at the same time.

      • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Haha, I'm too young to really have lived it, I'm only 26 so… I did experience the start of Facebook and Twitter. I'm very glad people who did live through it are expanding on it.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah it sounds like you got online right when Web 2.0 was starting to really kick off. Back before then we did have search functions, though they were pretty primitive compared to what they've become now (and also before they went to shit with excessive SEO and advertising). Web 2.0 really marked the emphasis towards UX design and social network functionality within web sites/design, though people had links on their personal pages well before all that.

  • joenforcer@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google is not a search engine. It's an advertising service. Their whole business model revolves around a critical mass of eyeballs, which flock to free services. This will never happen for the average user.

    • DrinkBoba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is it outrageous to pay for a product? There are obvious reasons and benefits. Go use a free one then. No need to bash a good product because you don’t want it.

      • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I never said Kagi is, I said Google would be if they applied the pricing model.

    • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Kagi is like google was 10 years ago though, useable and useful, while Google has morphed an SEO trashcan. I wouldn't pay them any amount for current quality

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I'm down for the concept, but the pricing on Kagi is also pretty steep. $5/month for 300 searches? $10 unlimited. I have no doubt there are serious costs involved in providing search, but for a layman like me it feels way more than it should be. Does google even make $120/user/year on search, or even $60?

      Anywho, I'd give it a go if it were cheaper, else, I'd rather be lightly advertised to on DuckDuckGo

      • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Eventually I will use the trial of it. I don't feel like I actually do that many searches, and most are me looking up Pokemons while I play the games. So 300 searches per month doesn't actually sound too bad, I can do my least important searches like my game ones on DDG.

  • Stuka@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I'm not sure you you understand how Google makes money…which would tell you why this would never happen.

  • drathvedro@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is literally how their search API works. Except the limit is more like 25 queries a day and the price would be closer to $40/mo for average user's usage.

    • drathvedro@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just to clarify. The API pricing is 100 requests per day for free and $5 for every 1000 requests over that. But, the API is limited to 10 items per request. Their own UI provides up to 100 results per page (the setting seems to be hidden now, but is still active for users who set it before), which would require multiple requests to match, plus an image and/or video carousels each of which require an additional query, opening images tab preloads 50 images just to fill the screen, which is 4 more requests minimum for any image search, and, given how clicking each image also loads a bunch of related images, the estimate of 4 requests per search is very conservative. I use search on average about 80 times a day, and, doing the math, it would cost me on average $33.48 per month to do my searches using their API instead of using the free and unlimited official UI. This is ridiculous. And then twitter and reddit did exactly the same thing, too.

  • Tick_Dracy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    What is that? Is that a meme or something?

    Either way, the solution for that is here. If you’re one of the poor souls that still enjoy using the Google Search, you can use Startpage, I guess.

  • SEND_NOODLES_PLS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I've recently started paying for unlimited searches over on Kagi, and I'm very happy with the results so far. I'd gladly pay if it meant less search cruft and higher result quality, but sadly Google's just been going downhill for quite a while now.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Its a big black box with an unquantifiable improvement in quality, and I have no particular inclination to sign of for yet another subscription service. Particularly when I already watch my existing services creep up in price year after year.

      That's before I even get into shit like standard utilities. My electricity bill last month was $500, almost entirely based on the Texas AC bill. Bro, who has another $10/mo to spend on Newoogle when I'm maxed out just keeping the lights on?

      • Misconduct@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Electric companies need to be taken to task it's getting stupid. Every year they whine about how the infrastructure can't handle our load and tell us to sweat it out during the hottest part of the day. Then, they raise the prices with the excuse of fixing it all and never do. It's fucking criminal

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Electric companies need to be taken to task it’s getting stupid.

          They'll never be taken to task, because the profits they generate go back into the political system that made them into a cartel to begin with. And efforts to break up the cartel often result in an increased dedication to organizing and opposing anti-trust practices. Its a system that Nassim Taleb might describe as "anti-fragile".

          • Misconduct@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I truly believe we can get there eventually if we just keep trying. The world is better off without us so it's really a win/win no matter what happens lol

      • SEND_NOODLES_PLS@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It's unquantifiable, yes, possibly even placebo at times, but I think of it as paying for the features on top of search. I particularly find being able to create and adopt a search "lens" / focus and the ability to (de)prioritise domains very useful for my situation and needs.

        That being said, I totally agree with your sentiment. I also only have limited subscriptions I can practically maintain, and I feel like this one's earned it's place well enough. To each their own I guess.

    • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So all they'd need to get you to pay is to lower the current quality of search results and add a shop option to restore it for $10?

  • Yoru@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    wait, what? is Google actually a paid service now or is this a meme./?

    • icedterminal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is a meme. Google would kill their business model if they did this. Their whole model is to collect data from user searches and then make money off it.

      • BillyTheSkidMark@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I'm pretty sure they get more money from people freely giving them data using a lot of their services (maps, search) than they'd get if they gatekept searching with a, subscription that people opted out of.

        • TeddE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You're 100% right. Last I heard, Google makes about $300 per person every year from the data it collects on us.

          … But I honestly think it's just a matter of time before the capitalist cook the golden goose and try to grab subscription bucks anyways.