• RobotZap10000@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Using the more-than-zero-click internet of today is like sticking your dick into the mysterious mush at the bottom of a dumpster; maybe it’ll feel good, but it will also certainly feel absolutely disgusting no matter what.

    A screenshot of the movie "Idiocracy". It shows a man watching the TV while obnoxious advertisements cover most of the screen.
    This is unironically how half of the planet uses the internet. Do you notice anything that might turn them off from clicking on another 5 links to find an answer to their question? Just one reason for them to all flock to ChatGPT for all of their browsing needs? I don’t, because I’m part of the other half that uses an adblocker, that has an objectively better experience of the internet. But now that Google is turning the screws on the browser extensions, that half might also stop clicking altogether.

    Then there are the cookie banners, the email-begging popups, the login walls, the top 3 or 5 or more search results being barely-relevant sponsored garbage, the dark patterns and so on and so forth. It just becomes too much to bear. Maybe not everyone is equipped with the understanding of the existence of enshittification, but everyone sure is sick and tired of it.

    And finally, there’s the dreaded paywall:
    A screenshot of the payment plans for a subscription for "The Atlantic" magazine. A banner at the top of the page reminds you that you receive a tote bag if you pay for the more expensive plan. The cheapest plan at 80 USD a year gives you unlimited access to digital articles and the 90 USD plan gets you printed magazines as well. It also has a checkbox to go ad-free for an additional 30 USD
    Everyone complains day and night about people not fact-checking information across multiple sources, but how on earth are we expected to do that with every single story when all of the journalism websites want you to whip out your credit card (they don’t even take my bank’s payment processor) to sign up for yet another subscription that STILL HAS ADS. Of course I’m going straight to the Wayback Machine (which is under attack from hackers and lawsuits) or paywall removers (which seem to work less and less). However, once again, most people don’t bypass them or don’t know how to, so they either pay up or or try to find another way.

    Today, our way of life requires us to ask countless questions which we simply don’t know the answers to. The fastest way to find them is through websites via search engines, but since shareholders value growth over profit, they all must be chock full of the aforementioned crap and bloat. The zero-click internet offers all of the benefits without any of the drawbacks. The nonzero-click internet simply doesn’t compete in time or convenience, even if it does in accuracy. If they want to have their users back, they’ll need to make their services not painful to use.

  • nthavoc@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 days ago

    Reminder: the Internet has its roots from ARPANET which is designed to survive an atomic blast and openly available to learn. A dead web business model won’t kill the technology that allows humans to instantly communicate. If anything a new internet may come of this once the money dries up.

  • 4k93n2@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    duckduckgo added the “instant answers” sidebar for the first time back in 2014 and google did the same not too long after, so its definitely not a new issue

  • Jimmycakes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    2 days ago

    The zero click searches just haven’t been monetized yet. Don’t worry they are working on it

    • paraphrand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      Totino’s Pizza Rolls remind you AI makes mistakes, always double check important information. [AD]

    • VitoRobles@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      It was around that time when we started making people visit the same 5-10 sites. Facebook virus indeed.

  • nothx [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Good?

    Not that I want more AI, but killing the internets business model can only be good for the future of the internet imo.

  • fubarx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Google is in an interesting predicament. Their ad service brings in so much revenue, but it’s based on search sending traffic to places where those ads are consumed.

    Boost search through Overviews and you’re limiting the effectiveness and reach of your ad service. And to top it off, your search needs content to ingest and remain relevant. But if the ad revenue drops off to websites, they go out of business, so search has less stuff to ingest.

    It’s like a reverse flywheel, where each part is working to harm the other part. People have been pointing this out for the last couple of years, but Google search just keeps adding more to Overviews and choking off the flow.

    And before you say “good, I hate ads,” most of the internet today and its services are paid by ad revenue changing hands. That includes ISPs that host the Fediverse, networking and storage gear makers, pretty much everything to do with open source, and so many jobs that exist to keep the whole thing humming so we can enjoy cat memes.

    If Google (or someone like Cloudflare) doesn’t figure out a way to keep the money flowing, we may be watching a sea shift in how the internet has worked in the last 30 years.

    • nucleative@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think Google can never really hope to disrupt itself. The entire company is oriented towards selling those ads. So any other internal division that tries to eliminate the ads division is going to have a very uphill battle.

      IMO the industry is ripening for disruption and someone will come along with a new idea for how to incentivize content generation and it will very likely continue to involve some heavy commercial marketing.

      • Ledericas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        yea they need those ads, youtube ads bring in around 37bn for the platform in ad revenue.

        • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Dinghy exactly. The CEO is whining about something nobody wanted, that’s maybe going to go away, and someone gets upset at you saying so? Makes no sense

        • quetzaldilla@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          The wording you chose did not adequately reflect that you were referring to the CEO.

          Rather, it sounds like you are criticizing the OP for sharing an article you do not understand or agree with, as it invited no discourse and only served to criticize, similar to the comments regularly posted below news articles.

          I do agree fully with you that CEOs rarely do work of any value, and their role is basically to siphon money from an organization like the parasites they are.