• 58008@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    At least they have an AI-free option, as annoying as it is to have to opt into it.

    On a related note, it’s hilarious to me that the Ecosia search engine has AI built in. Like, I don’t think planting any number of trees is going to offset the damage AI has done and will do to the planet.

      • NewDay@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 days ago

        Ecosia produces its own green solar energy. According to them, they produce twice as much as they consume. The AI is still shit, because it is just ChatGPT.

        • morto@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          17 days ago

          Reducing the albedo of some area just to disperse the captured energy for no utility (ai) is still harmful to the environment and contributes to earth’s energy imbalance. Solar energy is great when it replaces fossil fuel emissions, not when it’s just wasted.

        • Mwa@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          hot take: this comment gives me a idea for them a opt-in AI powered entirely by solar energy if we solve the ethics problem first ofc.

      • Bio bronk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        I don’t get this argument when literally everything else is hundreds of times worse like lifestock and cars. Removing either one today would dramatically change the environment.

        Do you drive a car or take any kind of transportation?

    • Electricd@lemmybefree.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Like, I don’t think planting any number of trees is going to offset the damage AI has done and will do to the planet.

      That’s true for pretty much everything, so not a real argument

  • setsubyou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    The article already notes that

    privacy-focused users who don’t want “AI” in their search are more likely to use DuckDuckGo

    But the opposite is also true. Maybe it’s not 90% to 10% elsewhere, but I’d expect the same general imbalance because some people who would answer yes to ai in a survey on a search web site don’t go to search web sites in the first place. They go to ChatGPT or whatever.

      • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        17 days ago

        That was the plan. That’s (I’m guessing) why the search results have slowly yet noticeably degraded since Ai has been consumer level.

        They WANT you to use Ai so they can cater the answers. (tin foil hat)

        I really do believe that though. Call me a conspiracy theorist but damn it, it fits.

            • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              17 days ago

              Most people don’t even know the difference between an URL bar and a search bar, or more precisely: most devices use a browser that deliberately obfuscates that difference.

              • kreskin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                14 days ago

                when browsers overload the url field to act as a search field, can you blame people for not knowing the difference? To the users its become a distinction without a difference.

                They say that whats tolerated is whats encouraged. Browser software companies have encouraged people to be uninformed about the tool they are using. Easier to mess with them that way.

      • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 days ago

        I know some of them personally and they usually claim to have decent to very good media literacy too. I would even say some of them are possibly more intelligent than me. Well, usually they are but when it comes to tech, they miss the forest for the trees I think.

      • truthfultemporarily@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        17 days ago

        I use kagi assistant. It does a search, summarizes, then gives references to the origin of each claim. Genuinely useful.

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          17 days ago

          How often do you check the summaries? Real question, I’ve used similar tools and the accuracy to what it’s citing has been hilariously bad. Be cool if there was a tool out there that was bucking the trend.

          • truthfultemporarily@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 days ago

            Depends on how important it is. Looking for a hint for a puzzle game: never. Trying to find out actually important info: always.

            They make it easy though because after every statement it has these numbered annotations and you can just mouse over to read the text.

            You can chose different models and they differ in quality. The default one can be a bit hit and miss.

          • AmbitiousProcess (they/them)@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            17 days ago

            I can’t speak for the original poster, but I also use Kagi and I sometimes use the AI assistant, mostly just for quick simple questions to save time when I know most articles on it are gonna have a lot of filler, but it’s been reliable for other more complex questions too. (I just would rather not rely on it too heavily since I know the cognitive debt effects of LLMs are quite real.)

            It’s almost always quite accurate. Kagi’s search indexing is miles ahead of any other search I’ve tried in the past (Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Ecosia, StartPage, Qwant, SearXNG) so the AI naturally pulls better sources than the others as a result of the underlying index. There’s a reason I pay Kagi 10 bucks a month for search results I could otherwise get on DuckDuckGo. It’s just that good.

            I will say though, on more complex questions with regard to like, very specific topics, such as a particular random programming library, specific statistics you’d only find from a government PDF somewhere with an obscure name, etc, it does tend to get it wrong. In my experience, it actually doesn’t hallucinate, as in if you check the sources there will be the information there… just not actually answering that question. (e.g. if you ask it about a stat and it pulls up reddit, but the stat is actually very obscure, it might accidentally pull a number from a comment about something entirely different than the stat you were looking for)

            In my experience, DuckDuckGo’s assistant was extremely likely to do this, even on more well-known topics, at a much higher frequency. Same with Google’s Gemini summaries.

            To be fair though, I think if you really, really use LLMs sparingly and with intention and an understanding of how relatively well known the topic is you’re searching for, you can avoid most hallucinations.

            • Ilias☃️@discuss.systems
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              16 days ago

              @AmbitiousProcess @Warl0k3

              I use Kagi as my primary search engine for almost 2 years now and it’s really good! I started to use the Kagi assistant recently to explain complex concepts to me and I like it. I love how it links me to sources. When I’m using a LLM tool, like Kagi’s assistant, I want to learn about the topic, I don’t use it for quick answers.

              A lot of people are just against ‘AI’/LLM’s, and I hate it too when it’s being shoved into my face. But consensual LLM’s are just another tool that I utilize to learn about something.

          • hayvan@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            17 days ago

            I use Perplexity for my searches, and it really depends on how much I care about the subject. I heard a name and don’t know who they are? LLM summary is good enough to have an idea. Doing research or looking up technical info? I open the cited sources.

        • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          17 days ago

          For others here, I use kagi and turned the LLM summaries off recently because they weren’t close to reliable enough for me personally so give it a test. I use LLMs for some tasks but I’m yet to find one that’s very reliable for specifics

        • IronBird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          it just makes it evermore obvious to them how many people in their life are sheep that believe anything the read online, i assume? a false sense of confidence where one mught have just said 'i dont know"

          • evol@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            17 days ago

            So many people were already using tiktok or youtube as google search. I think AI is arguably better than those

            edit: New business, take your chatgpt question and turn it into a tiktok video. The Slop must go on

            • AmbitiousProcess (they/them)@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              17 days ago

              The main problem is that LLMs are pulling from those sources too. An LLM often won’t distinguish between highly reputable sources and any random page that has enough relevant keywords, as it’s not actually capable of picking its own sources carefully and analyzing each one’s legitimacy, at least not without a ton of time and computing power that would make it unusable for most quick queries.

              • evol@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                17 days ago

                Genuinely, do you think the average person tiktok’ing their question is getting highly reputable sources? The average American has what, a 7th grade reading level? I think the LLM might have a better idea at this point

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      Yeah, this is why polling is hard.

      Online polls are much more likely to be answered by people who like to answer polls than people who don’t. People who use Duck Duck Go are much more likely to be privacy-focused, knowledgeable enough to use a different search engine other than the default, etc.

      This is also an echo chamber (The Fediverse) discussing the results of a poll on another similar echo chamber (Duck Duck Go). You won’t find nearly as many people on Lemmy or Mastodon who love AI as you will in most of the world. Still, I do get the impression that it’s a lot less popular than the AI companies want us to think.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      whoa nice! Thanks!

      For people trying to configure that in mozilla (I am trying to get away from it but for now :/)

      • -> Edit -> Settings -> Search
      • “Search Shortcuts” -> Add (to add a search engine)
      • “Search Engine Name”: DuckDuckGo Lite
      • “URL with %s in place of search term”: https://lite.duckduckgo.com/lite/?q=%25s (this has to be =%s, lemmy keeps mutilating that to =%25s everytime I save my post)
      • “Keyword (optional)”: @ddgl (or pick whatever you like - it appears @ddg is hardcoded and gets refused)
      • -> Save Engine
      • scroll up to the top, “Default Search Engine”
      • from the dropdown list, select “DuckGuckGo Lite”

      Done.

    • coffee_nutcase207@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      17 days ago

      It’s horrible for the environment too and wastes electricity. It’s fucked up that Google makes everything you search an AI search.

  • radio@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    17 days ago

    And how much of their budget are they blowing on AI features despite polls showing their regular users don’t even want it? Probably also 90%.

  • Young_Gilgamesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Google became crap ever since they added AI. Microsoft became crap ever since they added AI. OpenAI started losing money the moment they started working on AI. Coincidence? I think not!

    Rational people don’t want Abominable Intelligence anywhere near them.

    Personally, I don’t mind the AI overviews, but they shouldn’t show up every time you do a search. That’s just a waste of energy.

      • Reygle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 days ago

        I mind them. Nobody at my workplace scrolls beyond the AI overview and every single one of the overviews they quote to me about technical issues are wrong, 100%. Not even an occasional “lucky guess”.

    • Spaniard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      17 days ago

      Google and Microsoft were crap before AI, I don’t remember when google removed the “don’t be evil” but at that point they have been crap for a few years already.

    • MrKoyun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      You can choose how often you want the AI Overwiew to appear! It like asks you the first time you get one in a small pop up. I still think they should instead work on “highlighting relevant text from a website” like how google used to do. It was so much better.

      • Young_Gilgamesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        I did not know that. Never noticed a pop up. And does this work with both search engines? You can turn off the AI features on DuckDuckGo with like two clicks, but I can’t seem to find the option on Google.

        • MrKoyun@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          I was talking about DDG because I thought you were talking about DDG in the last part. I dont think you can turn off AI completely on Google.

  • Novis@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    17 days ago

    NOW the question is, will they listen? Cause we’ve seen so many times where a company says they’re taking feedback and then do the thing that their audience didn’t want them to do in the first place anyways. Now, of course, they could have more data and metrics that says people don’t care or do want the BS, but I doubt all the companies that DID go hard into AI actually looked at legit numbers, since all the big heads are now saying “why aren’t you people using this stuff?”

  • rose56@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    17 days ago

    Couple months ago, I learned that duckduckgo has settings about disabling AI content. Settings>AI features.
    Easy as that.

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    17 days ago

    Okay, so that’s not what the article says. It says that 90% of respondents don’t want AI search.

    Moreover, the article goes into detail about how DuckDuckGo is still going to implement AI anyway.

    Seriously, titles in subs like this need better moderation.

    The title was clearly engineered to generate clicks and drive engagement. That is not how journalism should function.

    • squaresinger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 days ago

      That is the title from the news article. It might not be how good journalism would work, but copying the title of the source is pretty standard in most news aggregator communities.

    • LobsterJim@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      17 days ago

      Unless I’m mistaken this title is generated to match the title at the link. Are you saying the mods should update titles to accurately reflect the content of the articles posted?