How Google Alters Search Queries to Get at Your Wallet
October 4, 2023 9:51 PM Subscribe
How Google Alters Search Queries to Get at Your Wallet.
"Google likely alters queries billions of times a day in trillions of different variations. Here’s how it works. Say you search for “children’s clothing.” Google converts it, without your knowledge, to a search for “NIKOLAI-brand kidswear,” making a behind-the-scenes substitution of your actual query with a different query that just happens to generate more money for the company, and will generate results you weren’t searching for at all. It’s not possible for you to opt out of the substitution. If you don’t get the results you want, and you try to refine your query, you are wasting your time. This is a twisted shopping mall you can’t escape."
Anecdotally, I despise how Google Maps continuously tries to route me towards fast food. Can anybody suggest a good maps app that doesn't try to upsell me on Wendy's? I'm already using Firefox, is DuckDuckGo the way to go for search engines? Bing? What do people recommend for getting away from Alphabet?
posted by LeRoienJaune at 10:10 PM on October 4, 2023 [9 favorites]
posted by LeRoienJaune at 10:10 PM on October 4, 2023 [9 favorites]
I discovered how shitty Google Maps has become on my recent trip overseas. It's become a useless yes-man of information. Sometimes it would randomly zoom out to a preposterous zoom level; I've been in Lisbon for five days straight and I just searched for a sandwich shop, what are the odds I want to get one in Madrid? Zooming in and 'searching this area' would often just revert the zoom somewhere else.
When I wanted to get some ice cream, and I would search for "ice cream", it would return a dozen results no matter how fine the area I was searching in. If there are two ice cream places nearby? Find ten restaurants that probably have ice cream on the menu, and return those with equal fervour. "There are only two ice cream shops in this area and here they are" is actually useful information it could be giving me, and instead it's giving me "here's someplace close by that has a gallon of vanilla somewhere in the walk-in".
posted by Superilla at 10:25 PM on October 4, 2023 [34 favorites]
When I wanted to get some ice cream, and I would search for "ice cream", it would return a dozen results no matter how fine the area I was searching in. If there are two ice cream places nearby? Find ten restaurants that probably have ice cream on the menu, and return those with equal fervour. "There are only two ice cream shops in this area and here they are" is actually useful information it could be giving me, and instead it's giving me "here's someplace close by that has a gallon of vanilla somewhere in the walk-in".
posted by Superilla at 10:25 PM on October 4, 2023 [34 favorites]
One thing that seems to be new for Google Maps is that for public transport, instead of showing me all the options like it used to, now it shows ones it thinks I like and I cannot get it to show all the other options. Super duper not fucking helpful. I dont need your stupid AI to guess what it thinks I like. Give me all the options and let me pick (this made me irrationally rage inside the other day when it took me an extra 30 minutes to get home because Google omitted routes I dont usually take).
Fucking-a why can't we just have computers that do what we tell them to?
posted by LizBoBiz at 10:46 PM on October 4, 2023 [76 favorites]
Fucking-a why can't we just have computers that do what we tell them to?
posted by LizBoBiz at 10:46 PM on October 4, 2023 [76 favorites]
I recently started paying for Kagi as a search engine and really like it so far. Given how fundamental search is to the internet it’s worth 10 bucks a month to me to not be manipulated and have ads constantly shovelled at me.
The general rule is that if something is free and the company is for profit, you’re actually the product and companies have the constant incentive to extract value for their real customers. That includes advertisements, data mining, manipulation, and anything else they can get away with.
I don’t expect them to, because regulators in the US are toothless, but if Meta lets me pay for an ad free Instagram, like they will in Europe, I’m all over it. I want to pay for anything I derive value from, because if I can’t then someone else is deriving value from me.
posted by mikesch at 10:55 PM on October 4, 2023 [55 favorites]
The general rule is that if something is free and the company is for profit, you’re actually the product and companies have the constant incentive to extract value for their real customers. That includes advertisements, data mining, manipulation, and anything else they can get away with.
I don’t expect them to, because regulators in the US are toothless, but if Meta lets me pay for an ad free Instagram, like they will in Europe, I’m all over it. I want to pay for anything I derive value from, because if I can’t then someone else is deriving value from me.
posted by mikesch at 10:55 PM on October 4, 2023 [55 favorites]
I dont need your stupid AI to guess what it thinks I like.
The premise of the next decade writ large!
posted by StarkRoads at 11:06 PM on October 4, 2023 [48 favorites]
The premise of the next decade writ large!
posted by StarkRoads at 11:06 PM on October 4, 2023 [48 favorites]
I'd pay to make sure _other_ people aren't being manipulated, so that the services I want to use can stay in business, and so that the people voting in my elections have a similar version of reality to me.
posted by amtho at 11:07 PM on October 4, 2023 [28 favorites]
posted by amtho at 11:07 PM on October 4, 2023 [28 favorites]
Seems like one more good reason to go after Google for their monopolistic behavior, where they are using their market dominance to direct traffic and shape online markets to increase profits and maintain or expand presence.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:44 PM on October 4, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:44 PM on October 4, 2023 [14 favorites]
Ohh so that's why google search results suck now. I was thinking SEO had finally corrupted search all the way, but the fact that it was google itself doing the SEO is quite a plot twist.
posted by tovarisch at 12:06 AM on October 5, 2023 [39 favorites]
posted by tovarisch at 12:06 AM on October 5, 2023 [39 favorites]
One thing that seems to be new for Google Maps is that for public transport, instead of showing me all the options like it used to, now it shows ones it thinks I like and I cannot get it to show all the other options.
The ones it shows you are paying Google a fee, and Google excludes the ones that aren’t paying the fee.
posted by jamjam at 12:36 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
The ones it shows you are paying Google a fee, and Google excludes the ones that aren’t paying the fee.
posted by jamjam at 12:36 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
That would be super weird, if the bus system pays to advertise only certain routes and not others, and also to push the bus instead of other means that are also in the same public system (I.e. trams and trains) in the same city
posted by LizBoBiz at 12:39 AM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by LizBoBiz at 12:39 AM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
I don't doubt that Google does some kind of keyword optimisation for the purposes of showing you ads, but I'd like to see something more than a "trust me bro" assertion from someone with a vested interest in taking Google down that it does so for the purposes of your search results.
posted by Dysk at 12:41 AM on October 5, 2023 [32 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 12:41 AM on October 5, 2023 [32 favorites]
Thanks, mikesch, for introducing me to Kagi. Their “why should I pay for search” page is a thing of beauty.
posted by antinomia at 12:51 AM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by antinomia at 12:51 AM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
Google converts it, without your knowledge, to a search for “NIKOLAI-brand kidswear,” making a behind-the-scenes substitution of your actual query with a different query that just happens to generate more money for the company,
Worth noting that two parties are represented here: the user, whose query is being altered without their consent, and the client who is having to pay for the fraudulently created enhanced sales lead. In that sense, the situation is quite similar to that frequently seen on Youtube where advertisters are being billed for TrueView adverts - which did not actually get displayed to the user. I am amazed by Google's ability to try to upset both users and paying clients at the same time. What other company could get away with such poor behaviour?
posted by rongorongo at 2:41 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
Worth noting that two parties are represented here: the user, whose query is being altered without their consent, and the client who is having to pay for the fraudulently created enhanced sales lead. In that sense, the situation is quite similar to that frequently seen on Youtube where advertisters are being billed for TrueView adverts - which did not actually get displayed to the user. I am amazed by Google's ability to try to upset both users and paying clients at the same time. What other company could get away with such poor behaviour?
posted by rongorongo at 2:41 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
Quelle surprise.
posted by fairmettle at 3:08 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by fairmettle at 3:08 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
Look, I love hating on Google as much as the next person, but I feel the need to point out that this piece, which has been making ALL the rounds, is an opinion piece (not news), by a former DuckDuckGo exec, based on a slide that they admittedly only saw for a second or two. It might be 100% completely accurate reporting, but then again...
posted by Inkoate at 3:43 AM on October 5, 2023 [63 favorites]
posted by Inkoate at 3:43 AM on October 5, 2023 [63 favorites]
The example given is... weird? There are lots of complaints to make about Google search results but if it were regularly returning items only relating to a specific brand when you made a generic query would be something at least some people had noticed? Have they?
If anything its biggest problem has long been the opposite - giving general results when you put in specific keywords.
Also it's not even spelt correctly - there's a Nikolia kidswear brand, but a search for "NIKOLAI" only returns copies of this article. Is it meant to be real?
posted by grahamparks at 4:08 AM on October 5, 2023 [7 favorites]
If anything its biggest problem has long been the opposite - giving general results when you put in specific keywords.
Also it's not even spelt correctly - there's a Nikolia kidswear brand, but a search for "NIKOLAI" only returns copies of this article. Is it meant to be real?
posted by grahamparks at 4:08 AM on October 5, 2023 [7 favorites]
It sounds like a test would be required involving the user recording the search term they entered - a collection of the results they were sent and then the information sent to the advertisers who paid to appear on that page. If “children’s clothing” does indeed convert to “NIKOLAI-brand kidswear” then that should be verifiable by Nikolai (nikolia in fact as noted); or not.
posted by rongorongo at 4:13 AM on October 5, 2023
posted by rongorongo at 4:13 AM on October 5, 2023
This is definitely explosive but like others I’m a bit skeptical that it’s this simple. As described, that seems like straight-up fraud if they’re charging an advertiser more for a query the user didn’t make and it seems hard to believe that nobody has noticed it and sued or complained to a regulator unless it was only done on a limited scale.
posted by adamsc at 4:24 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by adamsc at 4:24 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
To respond to the request for Google Maps alternatives above, have you tried OpenStreetMap/OsmAnd~?
posted by JHarris at 4:25 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by JHarris at 4:25 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
FYI, a related and also current FPP is called Notes on a Criminal Conspiracy: Google's Enshittification Memos.
posted by Bella Donna at 5:12 AM on October 5, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by Bella Donna at 5:12 AM on October 5, 2023 [7 favorites]
based on a slide that they admittedly only saw for a second or two
As I mentioned in the other thread, there's been tons of unnecessary secrecy allowed by the judge in this case. He eventually reversed his decision to scold prosecutors for posting the documents entered into (public) evidence online, but it's not clear to me if DOJ has started reposting yet. Does anyone know where to see those?
posted by mediareport at 5:24 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
As I mentioned in the other thread, there's been tons of unnecessary secrecy allowed by the judge in this case. He eventually reversed his decision to scold prosecutors for posting the documents entered into (public) evidence online, but it's not clear to me if DOJ has started reposting yet. Does anyone know where to see those?
posted by mediareport at 5:24 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
why can't we just have computers that do what we tell them to?
Well, they are doing what SOMEONE is telling them to do.
posted by Billiken at 5:31 AM on October 5, 2023 [22 favorites]
Well, they are doing what SOMEONE is telling them to do.
posted by Billiken at 5:31 AM on October 5, 2023 [22 favorites]
Damn.
This was outrageous enough to finally get me to change my default search engine to Duck Duck Go.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:35 AM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
This was outrageous enough to finally get me to change my default search engine to Duck Duck Go.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:35 AM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
For what it’s worth, Apple Maps (should you have an iOS device) seems to be just fine at returning relevant results, including public transit in the US and Europe. This is my experience at least. I flat deleted Google Maps from my devices first because search results (when clicked) ALWAYS open in GMaps, regardless of which map app is my default, and second because I hate sending more business to a company that has proven not to give a shit about the consumer.
My university-provided corporate email runs on a Google back-end, which forced me to install the Gmail app. I hate it. It had the nice side effect of co-opting the sign in process for my personal account - which I do not now nor have I ever used with the Gmail app - so now I can’t sign in to the email I’ve used since 2004 without opening an app I hate to find a confirmation code. There is no way to fix this that I have found, even with passkeys and external authentication apps already set up and available.
And that’s the issue, isn’t it? If Google is user-hostile, we need to remember how many universities and schools have made themselves hostage to Google services. My kid’s school, everything they do revolves around Google Docs and etc. My wife’s work, at the university library, uses the campus-provided GDocs and GDrive for all their collaborative work. And that is not including the millions of people who use Android devices, where the choice not to use Google services does not exist. You’d have to do a Ma Bell style breakup to split the productivity apps off of the search app at the same time you separated out the advertising stack. At least 3 companies, likely 4 if you push the hardware section off as a standalone.
posted by caution live frogs at 5:46 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
My university-provided corporate email runs on a Google back-end, which forced me to install the Gmail app. I hate it. It had the nice side effect of co-opting the sign in process for my personal account - which I do not now nor have I ever used with the Gmail app - so now I can’t sign in to the email I’ve used since 2004 without opening an app I hate to find a confirmation code. There is no way to fix this that I have found, even with passkeys and external authentication apps already set up and available.
And that’s the issue, isn’t it? If Google is user-hostile, we need to remember how many universities and schools have made themselves hostage to Google services. My kid’s school, everything they do revolves around Google Docs and etc. My wife’s work, at the university library, uses the campus-provided GDocs and GDrive for all their collaborative work. And that is not including the millions of people who use Android devices, where the choice not to use Google services does not exist. You’d have to do a Ma Bell style breakup to split the productivity apps off of the search app at the same time you separated out the advertising stack. At least 3 companies, likely 4 if you push the hardware section off as a standalone.
posted by caution live frogs at 5:46 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
I think some healthy skepticism is warranted given the lack of concrete evidence, but it's worth remembering WHY this is being reported from a few seconds glimpse of a slide. Because Google wanted it this way:
Google lawyers have explicitly argued that the judge should avoid allowing documents to become public solely because it is “clickbait.” To put it differently, the search giant literally argues material should stay sealed merely because it is interesting. Imagine if Bill Gates could have availed himself of that innovative legal argument!
In some ways this enrages me more than manipulating search results
posted by okonomichiyaki at 6:12 AM on October 5, 2023 [31 favorites]
Google lawyers have explicitly argued that the judge should avoid allowing documents to become public solely because it is “clickbait.” To put it differently, the search giant literally argues material should stay sealed merely because it is interesting. Imagine if Bill Gates could have availed himself of that innovative legal argument!
In some ways this enrages me more than manipulating search results
posted by okonomichiyaki at 6:12 AM on October 5, 2023 [31 favorites]
A while ago I was surprised to hear Google Maps telling me "turn left on Page Avenue at the Steak & Shake." Page Avenue being a pretty major road, the added landmark isn't very helpful, it's just advertising. The irony is, that Steak & Shake location has been closed for months.
posted by Foosnark at 6:15 AM on October 5, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by Foosnark at 6:15 AM on October 5, 2023 [16 favorites]
regardless of which map app is my default
There's no concept of default system wide maps app in iOS. Some apps might have a setting but outside of those a maps.google.com link will always open in the Google Maps app (if installed), because that's a behaviour iOS does allow/encourage, and iOS doesn't give users any control over whether to do this or to stay in the browser or to direct it to a different app.
(app developers can't even offer a preference to turn the feature off, since it's configured via the app's embedded metadata when the app is first installed)
posted by grahamparks at 6:22 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
There's no concept of default system wide maps app in iOS. Some apps might have a setting but outside of those a maps.google.com link will always open in the Google Maps app (if installed), because that's a behaviour iOS does allow/encourage, and iOS doesn't give users any control over whether to do this or to stay in the browser or to direct it to a different app.
(app developers can't even offer a preference to turn the feature off, since it's configured via the app's embedded metadata when the app is first installed)
posted by grahamparks at 6:22 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
I’m interested in learning more about Kagi, but their tagline of “ We stop attempts to influence your behaviour. No biases, no agendas.” feels weird to someone who remembers that was the original marketing for Fox News, which had quite a lot of biases and agendas.
posted by Jon_Evil at 6:33 AM on October 5, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by Jon_Evil at 6:33 AM on October 5, 2023 [14 favorites]
Zooming in and 'searching this area' would often just revert the zoom somewhere else.
…
One thing that seems to be new for Google Maps is that for public transport, instead of showing me all the options like it used to, now it shows ones it thinks I like and I cannot get it to show all the other options.
I’ve noticed both these problems as well lately. I would love to see a breakdown of the different features people use Google Maps for (driving directions, transit directions, businesses of category X in this area, map to scroll through to understand area, etc.) and a comparison of which apps work best for each. For instance, I think Yelp may now be better for “ice cream in this area” and Apple Maps is often better for driving directions.
I’d attempt this but it would be biased toward my location, transit system, phone type, etc. You’d really want testing by a large international news organization to get the full picture.
posted by smelendez at 6:37 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
…
One thing that seems to be new for Google Maps is that for public transport, instead of showing me all the options like it used to, now it shows ones it thinks I like and I cannot get it to show all the other options.
I’ve noticed both these problems as well lately. I would love to see a breakdown of the different features people use Google Maps for (driving directions, transit directions, businesses of category X in this area, map to scroll through to understand area, etc.) and a comparison of which apps work best for each. For instance, I think Yelp may now be better for “ice cream in this area” and Apple Maps is often better for driving directions.
I’d attempt this but it would be biased toward my location, transit system, phone type, etc. You’d really want testing by a large international news organization to get the full picture.
posted by smelendez at 6:37 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
For bike directions, both Google Maps and Apple Maps are terrible in exciting and different ways. Google Maps seems to have a slightly better and more up to date understanding of which roads have bike lanes or are pleasant to ride on, yet it also frequently routes me down alleys to avoid heavier traffic roads. But alleys are full of potholes and broken glass and people backing out of garages and then you have to cross streets mid-block if it's telling you to ride in an alley for multiple blocks (which it does, frequently).
Apple Maps seems to have less general data about official bike routes and lanes and will tell you to ride on absolutely terrible roads with no infrastructure for biking.
I just love that riding a bike a few miles requires a half hour of research and looking on street view to make sure none of the "sophisticated" mapping apps send you into a death trap.
posted by misskaz at 6:55 AM on October 5, 2023 [15 favorites]
Apple Maps seems to have less general data about official bike routes and lanes and will tell you to ride on absolutely terrible roads with no infrastructure for biking.
I just love that riding a bike a few miles requires a half hour of research and looking on street view to make sure none of the "sophisticated" mapping apps send you into a death trap.
posted by misskaz at 6:55 AM on October 5, 2023 [15 favorites]
The irony is, that Steak & Shake location has been closed for months.
Their AI has finally become advanced enough to emulate the cashier at a lonely gas station surrounded on all sides by 18 miles of cornfield!
Now go on thataway through three red lights and then hand a left where the Piggly Wiggly used to be, and John's house is on the left right across from where the Jenkins boy got kilt.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 7:32 AM on October 5, 2023 [32 favorites]
Their AI has finally become advanced enough to emulate the cashier at a lonely gas station surrounded on all sides by 18 miles of cornfield!
Now go on thataway through three red lights and then hand a left where the Piggly Wiggly used to be, and John's house is on the left right across from where the Jenkins boy got kilt.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 7:32 AM on October 5, 2023 [32 favorites]
we need to remember how many universities and schools have made themselves hostage to Google services
Ohhh yeah. A few years ago: unlimited storage! This year: students capped at 100G, faculty/lab caps incoming, and I've heard about paying for storage plans at other universities.
Right up there with how much I hate MS Office "online".
posted by Dashy at 7:37 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
Ohhh yeah. A few years ago: unlimited storage! This year: students capped at 100G, faculty/lab caps incoming, and I've heard about paying for storage plans at other universities.
Right up there with how much I hate MS Office "online".
posted by Dashy at 7:37 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
Google maps on my iPhone…. The map is covered with paid ad placement locations but street names? Who needs street names?
posted by njohnson23 at 7:38 AM on October 5, 2023 [23 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 7:38 AM on October 5, 2023 [23 favorites]
The framing of "they are changing the query" versus "they are changing the results" strikes me as curious.
posted by stevil at 7:42 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by stevil at 7:42 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
Changing the results is of course something that Google never does. I mean, they might put ads at the top of search results, but they're marked as ADs by tiny light gray text. But letting advertisers outright pay to put unmarked ads into search results is famously one of the things that distinguished Google from Excite, Lycos, Infoseek and all those other early search engines. If they did that now, it'd look just like they only held off from doing until all their meaningful competitors from that time had died, which of course they'd never do, Don't Be Evil and all that.
No no, instead of invisibly changing the results, they invisibly change the query, which is of course completely totally different, even if it does end up putting one of their advertisers at the top of the search results.
posted by JHarris at 7:49 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
No no, instead of invisibly changing the results, they invisibly change the query, which is of course completely totally different, even if it does end up putting one of their advertisers at the top of the search results.
posted by JHarris at 7:49 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
Google maps is the official way of determining whether and how much I get paid for travel. It'll be interesting if those results are getting manipulated to lengthen the trip for the benefit of Google/advertisers.
posted by Mitheral at 7:54 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Mitheral at 7:54 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
It may well be that Google is doing what the article describes, but the article does not offer any evidence of this other than a brief glimpse at a slide. It's Wired click-bait conjecture.
posted by Ayn Marx at 8:29 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Ayn Marx at 8:29 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
One thing that seems to be new for Google Maps is that for public transport, instead of showing me all the options like it used to, now it shows ones it thinks I like and I cannot get it to show all the other options.
Also for driving! If you believe Google Maps, there is only one route a driver can take from the north side of Chicago to the ENTIRE STATE OF MICHIGAN.
Not, "a most efficient route followed by a few less-optimal alternatives." Just one single road, apparently, out of and into two entire states.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 8:31 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
Also for driving! If you believe Google Maps, there is only one route a driver can take from the north side of Chicago to the ENTIRE STATE OF MICHIGAN.
Not, "a most efficient route followed by a few less-optimal alternatives." Just one single road, apparently, out of and into two entire states.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 8:31 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
I definitely get "semantically similar" search results a lot but usually from what seems like a misguided attempt to help by giving me something more popular. (For an example, searching for "electric piano" returns a lot of results for "digital piano" and "electronic keyboard" which are semantically similar but not the same thing.)
One clue is when the excerpt from the page bolds a phrase that is not what I actually searched for.
I guess if we're making a distinction between changing the query and changing the results, that bolding would make it obvious they were adding brand names to the query. Unless they save the unmodified query and use that for bolding in excerpts, and only use the modified query for generating the list of results. But at that point, it seems like I should just call it changing the results, not the query. Unless they're reporting those modified queries to a third party like advertisers, which would be straight-up fraud.
posted by RobotHero at 8:50 AM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
One clue is when the excerpt from the page bolds a phrase that is not what I actually searched for.
I guess if we're making a distinction between changing the query and changing the results, that bolding would make it obvious they were adding brand names to the query. Unless they save the unmodified query and use that for bolding in excerpts, and only use the modified query for generating the list of results. But at that point, it seems like I should just call it changing the results, not the query. Unless they're reporting those modified queries to a third party like advertisers, which would be straight-up fraud.
posted by RobotHero at 8:50 AM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
Google maps on my iPhone…. The map is covered with paid ad placement locations but street names? Who needs street names?
Oh lord yes. But that's been a bane forever, since long before the ads - seeing the actual names of half the streets means zooming and rezooming and rezooming until you find the level that shows you the name you want, at which point the names of half the other streets disappear.
posted by trig at 9:06 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
Oh lord yes. But that's been a bane forever, since long before the ads - seeing the actual names of half the streets means zooming and rezooming and rezooming until you find the level that shows you the name you want, at which point the names of half the other streets disappear.
posted by trig at 9:06 AM on October 5, 2023 [11 favorites]
@mikesch thanks for the link. I went there and signed up for the trial, and if it works out will be buying the family pack.
@Jon_Evil The difference is, the Fox viewers are not paying to produce Fox content. The Fox audience is the product, in other words, not really the customer. This is a basic fact about ad-supported services. Once upon a time, it was not possible to target audiences so precisely, so the content to attract them had to have some minimum quality. Fox was able to identify and precisely target a demographic which, not to put too fine an edge on it, consists roughly of the dumbest, most gullible, hateful, laziest, and greediest 30% of the adult US population. These people are the product, not the customers: the customers are the perpetrators of the Long Con.
A more apt comparison would be Google starting out with the motto "don't be evil" and morphing into what it currently is. Which happened precisely because Google is ad-supported. Kagi, by charging us actual money that we could instead spend on beer or weed or taxes, is saying to us "you are the customer, not the product."
Now, does anybody know of a decent user-supported browser project? I would pay $35 for a browser, or $100 even. Probably even $100/year, for family licensing. Is there a pure open-source browser you can build on Windows that works with most of the Web? How about something hosted on Android phones?
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 9:07 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
@Jon_Evil The difference is, the Fox viewers are not paying to produce Fox content. The Fox audience is the product, in other words, not really the customer. This is a basic fact about ad-supported services. Once upon a time, it was not possible to target audiences so precisely, so the content to attract them had to have some minimum quality. Fox was able to identify and precisely target a demographic which, not to put too fine an edge on it, consists roughly of the dumbest, most gullible, hateful, laziest, and greediest 30% of the adult US population. These people are the product, not the customers: the customers are the perpetrators of the Long Con.
A more apt comparison would be Google starting out with the motto "don't be evil" and morphing into what it currently is. Which happened precisely because Google is ad-supported. Kagi, by charging us actual money that we could instead spend on beer or weed or taxes, is saying to us "you are the customer, not the product."
Now, does anybody know of a decent user-supported browser project? I would pay $35 for a browser, or $100 even. Probably even $100/year, for family licensing. Is there a pure open-source browser you can build on Windows that works with most of the Web? How about something hosted on Android phones?
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 9:07 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
Not really fraud though as Google isn't promising to apply any metric for determining search results. It's always been "using black magic here's some pages you might be looking for". Pretty much since the first time they tweaked page rank they've been considering their interests in addition to the users.
posted by Mitheral at 9:07 AM on October 5, 2023
posted by Mitheral at 9:07 AM on October 5, 2023
Google maps on my iPhone…. The map is covered with paid ad placement locations but street names? Who needs street names?
My petty complaint: if you can put a bunch of business names on the dang map, then you can put a marker that tells how long a traffic jam (red line) is on the map, in time or distance. Why color it red but then I have to eyeball the tiny distance calculator and judge it myself, while also driving?
posted by The_Vegetables at 9:16 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
My petty complaint: if you can put a bunch of business names on the dang map, then you can put a marker that tells how long a traffic jam (red line) is on the map, in time or distance. Why color it red but then I have to eyeball the tiny distance calculator and judge it myself, while also driving?
posted by The_Vegetables at 9:16 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
Whatever google is or isn't doing, their search results lately suck. Finding older content and relevant content is far harder than it should be. I think I'm convinced to start paying for Kagi, but I think they need to lower their pricing or bundle with other services.
Not because I think $5 or $10 a month is too much, but I've got hardcore subscription fatigue for services, Patreons, and subscriptions. (Though, sadly, I don't need to pay for The Nib anymore.) Someone in another fora suggested a bundle of Kagi, a VPN service, etc. and that would get my attention. I wonder if it'd be feasible to start some kind of indie/privacy subscription to underwrite privacy and user friendly online services and tools...
posted by jzb at 9:19 AM on October 5, 2023 [10 favorites]
Not because I think $5 or $10 a month is too much, but I've got hardcore subscription fatigue for services, Patreons, and subscriptions. (Though, sadly, I don't need to pay for The Nib anymore.) Someone in another fora suggested a bundle of Kagi, a VPN service, etc. and that would get my attention. I wonder if it'd be feasible to start some kind of indie/privacy subscription to underwrite privacy and user friendly online services and tools...
posted by jzb at 9:19 AM on October 5, 2023 [10 favorites]
As it happens, I have been adjacent to some of these data systems, and what's being described is sufficiently incorrect that I suspect it was on purpose. Now then, many disclaimers because I am not presently adjacent to these systems and Google has literally dozens of teams constantly changing things so in fact nobody on Earth has a holistic view of precisely what is happening at any given moment in time and I do NOT presently work for Google. Indeed, I would argue that it cannot be known in the present, only after-the-fact.
Semantic expansion, in the beginning, was a method of addressing the fact that people are woefully imprecise and computers require precision. When people search for "kids clothes" do they mean shirts, pants, socks, underwear, shoes, jackets, possibly umbrellas in some cases, all of the above, something entirely different or what? So they built a system that was aware of these concepts and (this is key) automatically tried out variations of your search query to see what came up, and paid a small army of contractors a pittance to review anonymized results and rate them. This fed back into the query system -- so the search system began to learn things like "when people search for kids clothing a result that is all about umbrellas gets rated poorly so don't show that unless we've got nothing else"
They also built a system that watches your engagement with the search results -- if you click on a result and then immediately back out and click something else or revise your query, that original result gets classed as a "short click". If you disappear into the result for several minutes, and then when Google sees you again you're doing something else, then the result gets classed as a "long click". Results which produce long clicks get up-ranked, while results that produce short clicks get down-ranked.
Next up, the semantic systems get plugged in to the engagement systems, and the search engine begins to recognize things like:
"queries that are searching for kids clothing never long-click on a result that talks about umbrellas, but queries that are doing the same search DO long-click on results which include jackets, therefore jackets are more semantically adjacent to kids clothing than umbrellas"
...without requiring any feedback from that army of contractors rating search results (which still happens, and is still a data point feeding in to the system in my example above but I'll never finish if I include all the bits and pieces I'm aware of, to say nothing of the dozens of pieces I don't even know exist).
So, then things got even more complicated, trying to compare various forms of queries to see which ones get more long-clicks, what differences may exist between the query streams, and which of those differences are significant. Remember, also, that all large modern web systems are running dozens or hundreds of experiments simultaneously on slices of their traffic, so for any given encounter you are probably part of multiple experiments.
Skipping over several thousand pages of details, fundamentally the search system appends the clothing brand name because at a given point in time (that is, the exact microsecond that someone hits enter to execute the query), results which included that specific brand name were ranked fractionally higher than results which did not include that brand name, so the version which DID include that brand name gets executed instead.
If a statistically-usable percentage of the population started including "MOBANKIEZ" when searching for pencil erasers, and they long-clicked on results that prominently featured "ULTRAZEXXY" on the page, then the next time you search for a pencil eraser the system will silently append MOBANKIEZ to see what happens and if that result ranks higher it may then tend to show you results that feature ULTRAZEXXY on the page. This is why the bolded parts, mentioned above while I'm still typing, do not necessarily relate to what you were personally looking for -- for a larger percentage of users it got enough long-clicks, so it gets bolded.
...the same basic process happens for ads as well. Ad results are rated, they analyze short-vs-long clicks, and so on. Ads which are statistically superior get shown BUUUUT there's also a pricing auction that happens which complicates everything.
However, the ad system and the search system don't really talk to each other. Setting aside any ethical issue, it's difficult enough for each system to respond rapidly; trying to weight search results or fiddle with semantic adjacency based on ad system auction results and rankings is just too slow. I mean, I know someone who was celebrated in her department for cutting a substantial fraction of a microsecond out of response time deep in the system. The search system and the ad system DO cross-pollinate, so when the search folks figured out semantic expansion, the ad people grabbed the concept and built something similar, but they're not the same and they're not connected. In fact, at this point practically every team anywhere has some form of semantic expansion -- even in small corners like geographic location queries ("when someone searches for [coffee near me] should I include a result that's in the next town, even if that's closer than the result which is in the same town? What about the presence of that river?" which naturally becomes even more complex than just that, since there's all kinds of literal rules about what "nearness" means in the context of geography and location privacy).
And, obviously, I am eliding a hideous level of detail -- some of which I am eliding on purpose in the interest of not driving us all mad, and MUCH of which I am eliding by accident because I never even knew that system existed.
posted by aramaic at 9:19 AM on October 5, 2023 [73 favorites]
Semantic expansion, in the beginning, was a method of addressing the fact that people are woefully imprecise and computers require precision. When people search for "kids clothes" do they mean shirts, pants, socks, underwear, shoes, jackets, possibly umbrellas in some cases, all of the above, something entirely different or what? So they built a system that was aware of these concepts and (this is key) automatically tried out variations of your search query to see what came up, and paid a small army of contractors a pittance to review anonymized results and rate them. This fed back into the query system -- so the search system began to learn things like "when people search for kids clothing a result that is all about umbrellas gets rated poorly so don't show that unless we've got nothing else"
They also built a system that watches your engagement with the search results -- if you click on a result and then immediately back out and click something else or revise your query, that original result gets classed as a "short click". If you disappear into the result for several minutes, and then when Google sees you again you're doing something else, then the result gets classed as a "long click". Results which produce long clicks get up-ranked, while results that produce short clicks get down-ranked.
Next up, the semantic systems get plugged in to the engagement systems, and the search engine begins to recognize things like:
"queries that are searching for kids clothing never long-click on a result that talks about umbrellas, but queries that are doing the same search DO long-click on results which include jackets, therefore jackets are more semantically adjacent to kids clothing than umbrellas"
...without requiring any feedback from that army of contractors rating search results (which still happens, and is still a data point feeding in to the system in my example above but I'll never finish if I include all the bits and pieces I'm aware of, to say nothing of the dozens of pieces I don't even know exist).
So, then things got even more complicated, trying to compare various forms of queries to see which ones get more long-clicks, what differences may exist between the query streams, and which of those differences are significant. Remember, also, that all large modern web systems are running dozens or hundreds of experiments simultaneously on slices of their traffic, so for any given encounter you are probably part of multiple experiments.
Skipping over several thousand pages of details, fundamentally the search system appends the clothing brand name because at a given point in time (that is, the exact microsecond that someone hits enter to execute the query), results which included that specific brand name were ranked fractionally higher than results which did not include that brand name, so the version which DID include that brand name gets executed instead.
If a statistically-usable percentage of the population started including "MOBANKIEZ" when searching for pencil erasers, and they long-clicked on results that prominently featured "ULTRAZEXXY" on the page, then the next time you search for a pencil eraser the system will silently append MOBANKIEZ to see what happens and if that result ranks higher it may then tend to show you results that feature ULTRAZEXXY on the page. This is why the bolded parts, mentioned above while I'm still typing, do not necessarily relate to what you were personally looking for -- for a larger percentage of users it got enough long-clicks, so it gets bolded.
...the same basic process happens for ads as well. Ad results are rated, they analyze short-vs-long clicks, and so on. Ads which are statistically superior get shown BUUUUT there's also a pricing auction that happens which complicates everything.
However, the ad system and the search system don't really talk to each other. Setting aside any ethical issue, it's difficult enough for each system to respond rapidly; trying to weight search results or fiddle with semantic adjacency based on ad system auction results and rankings is just too slow. I mean, I know someone who was celebrated in her department for cutting a substantial fraction of a microsecond out of response time deep in the system. The search system and the ad system DO cross-pollinate, so when the search folks figured out semantic expansion, the ad people grabbed the concept and built something similar, but they're not the same and they're not connected. In fact, at this point practically every team anywhere has some form of semantic expansion -- even in small corners like geographic location queries ("when someone searches for [coffee near me] should I include a result that's in the next town, even if that's closer than the result which is in the same town? What about the presence of that river?" which naturally becomes even more complex than just that, since there's all kinds of literal rules about what "nearness" means in the context of geography and location privacy).
And, obviously, I am eliding a hideous level of detail -- some of which I am eliding on purpose in the interest of not driving us all mad, and MUCH of which I am eliding by accident because I never even knew that system existed.
posted by aramaic at 9:19 AM on October 5, 2023 [73 favorites]
I haven't experienced anything that specific, but Google search has degraded in usefulness quite a bit. I miss the old, accurate, straightforward, fast results of OG Google. Label the ads, give the results, 'k?
posted by theora55 at 9:23 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by theora55 at 9:23 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
A while ago I was surprised to hear Google Maps telling me "turn left on Page Avenue at the Steak & Shake."
LOL, I was instantly like “Oh, hey, a St. Louisan.” (I’m from Kirkwood.)
posted by Horace Rumpole at 9:36 AM on October 5, 2023 [5 favorites]
LOL, I was instantly like “Oh, hey, a St. Louisan.” (I’m from Kirkwood.)
posted by Horace Rumpole at 9:36 AM on October 5, 2023 [5 favorites]
Not really fraud though as Google isn't promising to apply any metric for determining search results.
The claim mentioned in the article is that google as a monopoly is using this tactic to manipulate ad prices.
Advertisers pay a higher or lower rate depending on the search query someone used.
Classic "expensive" search queries and keywords to run ads against are competing brands. So if you're Adidas and you're running a campaign on Google, displaying ada when someone searches "running shoes" would be cheap. "Nike running shoes" would be expensive.
If google is swapping out what the user searches for in the background, and using that instead to price what advertisers are paying, that sounds like price manipulation to me — and, in my personal opinion, a fraudulent business practice if true.
posted by UN at 9:39 AM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
The claim mentioned in the article is that google as a monopoly is using this tactic to manipulate ad prices.
Advertisers pay a higher or lower rate depending on the search query someone used.
Classic "expensive" search queries and keywords to run ads against are competing brands. So if you're Adidas and you're running a campaign on Google, displaying ada when someone searches "running shoes" would be cheap. "Nike running shoes" would be expensive.
If google is swapping out what the user searches for in the background, and using that instead to price what advertisers are paying, that sounds like price manipulation to me — and, in my personal opinion, a fraudulent business practice if true.
posted by UN at 9:39 AM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
@aramaic I feel like you are really reaching for an explanation of Google's behavior that does not amount to "Don't Be Evil is no longer the motto."
I mean yes, most people are not that good at using digital algorithmic systems, but have you noticed how Advanced Search has been systematically crippled so that you can no longer exclude the tornado of garbage results that the algorithms want to show you? If the whole thing about user imprecision carried water, why on Earth would they have deleted that?
Did you ever use advanced search, back when it was a thing?
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 10:14 AM on October 5, 2023 [9 favorites]
I mean yes, most people are not that good at using digital algorithmic systems, but have you noticed how Advanced Search has been systematically crippled so that you can no longer exclude the tornado of garbage results that the algorithms want to show you? If the whole thing about user imprecision carried water, why on Earth would they have deleted that?
Did you ever use advanced search, back when it was a thing?
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 10:14 AM on October 5, 2023 [9 favorites]
Google maps is the official way of determining whether and how much I get paid for travel. It'll be interesting if those results are getting manipulated to lengthen the trip for the benefit of Google/advertisers.
I've seen it used for other semi-official purposes too, like determining whether kids live far enough in terms of walking distance from a school to qualify for a school bus. Here's a random example.
It's a little scary because I don't think Google claims Maps is valid in any particular way for these purposes? Like its default driving routes seem to involve some complex calculation involving time, mileage, and fuel economy, and I don't think it is really designed to provide reasonable walking routes for schoolchildren.
posted by smelendez at 10:33 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
I've seen it used for other semi-official purposes too, like determining whether kids live far enough in terms of walking distance from a school to qualify for a school bus. Here's a random example.
It's a little scary because I don't think Google claims Maps is valid in any particular way for these purposes? Like its default driving routes seem to involve some complex calculation involving time, mileage, and fuel economy, and I don't think it is really designed to provide reasonable walking routes for schoolchildren.
posted by smelendez at 10:33 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
I just wish Apple Maps didn’t look and feel so clunky compared to Google maps (aside from the paid placement of course).
posted by gottabefunky at 10:42 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by gottabefunky at 10:42 AM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
> If Google is user-hostile, we need to remember how many universities and schools have made themselves hostage to Google services. My kid’s school, everything they do revolves around Google Docs and etc. My wife’s work, at the university library, uses the campus-provided GDocs and GDrive for all their collaborative work.
Meanwhile, my institution is hostage to Microsoft (in all kinds of ways), and I would give a pinky to go back to Stockholm Syndrome with Google after years of the excremental hellscape that is its "suite" (which is more an assemblage of cadaver parts without even the illumination of a single spark of life).
posted by fncll at 10:49 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
Meanwhile, my institution is hostage to Microsoft (in all kinds of ways), and I would give a pinky to go back to Stockholm Syndrome with Google after years of the excremental hellscape that is its "suite" (which is more an assemblage of cadaver parts without even the illumination of a single spark of life).
posted by fncll at 10:49 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
while ago I was surprised to hear Google Maps telling me "turn left on Page Avenue at the Steak & Shake."
As a non-local, I might actually find that useful if it could be kept current. Street signs are hard to read until you're right there and street names are still commonly mispronounced by Google. Store signs OTOH in the USA often tower over traffic so that you can readily find them.
posted by beaning at 10:50 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
As a non-local, I might actually find that useful if it could be kept current. Street signs are hard to read until you're right there and street names are still commonly mispronounced by Google. Store signs OTOH in the USA often tower over traffic so that you can readily find them.
posted by beaning at 10:50 AM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
The option I really want tho is for Google maps to allow "in 15 minutes in the direction I am traveling" or "in 30 miles along the route I am traveling" option for restaurants and hotels. Too often, results are for sites past me or by the time I assess them, it's too late to make the exit.
posted by beaning at 10:50 AM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by beaning at 10:50 AM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
I feel like you are really reaching for an explanation of Google's behavior
Did you ever use advanced search, back when it was a thing?
Sorry, but you're the one reaching, and there's no particular reason to be patronizing.
Advanced Search got nuked by the reason everything in Google gets nuked -- some random VP and their PMs decided their new toy ("we don't need advanced search anymore!") was better, so they went to war, the Advanced Search people lost, the new toy(s) got launched on google.com, they all got promoted, and then they left.
Literally everything Google does can be best understood as an artifact of how their performance review & promotion system works (or, more accurately, doesn't work at all except as a Rube Goldberg contraption designed to devour time and attention).
Besides which, the entirety of the google.com source is in a single repository that can be traversed by anyone with coding privileges. Literally the first thing just about everyone does is pop down into some random subsection purely to see if they can. There's no secret "put_thumb_on_scale" subsystem; people would find it and decide they wanna play Internet Hero.
There isn't any overarching plan; the entire thing is an unbelievably vast mutating collection of subsystems, some of which compete with each other. Google Search is a data amoeba driven by people angling in different directions for their next promotion. Literally.
posted by aramaic at 11:10 AM on October 5, 2023 [38 favorites]
Did you ever use advanced search, back when it was a thing?
Sorry, but you're the one reaching, and there's no particular reason to be patronizing.
Advanced Search got nuked by the reason everything in Google gets nuked -- some random VP and their PMs decided their new toy ("we don't need advanced search anymore!") was better, so they went to war, the Advanced Search people lost, the new toy(s) got launched on google.com, they all got promoted, and then they left.
Literally everything Google does can be best understood as an artifact of how their performance review & promotion system works (or, more accurately, doesn't work at all except as a Rube Goldberg contraption designed to devour time and attention).
Besides which, the entirety of the google.com source is in a single repository that can be traversed by anyone with coding privileges. Literally the first thing just about everyone does is pop down into some random subsection purely to see if they can. There's no secret "put_thumb_on_scale" subsystem; people would find it and decide they wanna play Internet Hero.
There isn't any overarching plan; the entire thing is an unbelievably vast mutating collection of subsystems, some of which compete with each other. Google Search is a data amoeba driven by people angling in different directions for their next promotion. Literally.
posted by aramaic at 11:10 AM on October 5, 2023 [38 favorites]
@aramaic
You're right, the last sentence of my previous was not needed. I apologize for being antagonistic.
Literally everything Google does can be best understood as an artifact of how their performance review & promotion system works (or, more accurately, doesn't work at all except as a Rube Goldberg contraption designed to devour time and attention).
That is a very sweeping assertion, extraordinary enough to demand extraordinary evidence.
Another principle that commonly explains the large-scale behavior of for-profit organizations is maximizing the bottom line. Not wanting to sound like "enshittification is the new black" but the concept really does explain a lot with respect to Google's search UI and the way its behavior has changed.
Google is in fact rich enough that "vanity projects of VPs being foisted into production" can be a thing, and that maybe explains a lot about the fate of projects like Reader, which seems to have many mourners. But search is where the money is, and the pressure to optimize that for cash flow is expected to be pretty intense.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 11:41 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
You're right, the last sentence of my previous was not needed. I apologize for being antagonistic.
Literally everything Google does can be best understood as an artifact of how their performance review & promotion system works (or, more accurately, doesn't work at all except as a Rube Goldberg contraption designed to devour time and attention).
That is a very sweeping assertion, extraordinary enough to demand extraordinary evidence.
Another principle that commonly explains the large-scale behavior of for-profit organizations is maximizing the bottom line. Not wanting to sound like "enshittification is the new black" but the concept really does explain a lot with respect to Google's search UI and the way its behavior has changed.
Google is in fact rich enough that "vanity projects of VPs being foisted into production" can be a thing, and that maybe explains a lot about the fate of projects like Reader, which seems to have many mourners. But search is where the money is, and the pressure to optimize that for cash flow is expected to be pretty intense.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 11:41 AM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
I'm fascinated by everyone seeming to have shitty experiences with Google Maps. I use Maps daily and this seems like the sort of problem I either never run into or manage to subconsciously ignore. It never sends me to a totally different location when I'm zoomed in and making a generic search. It will give me some outliers when I'm search for something specific (like ice cream in the above example) but still does better than every food ordering service when doing a similar search.
posted by thecjm at 11:57 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by thecjm at 11:57 AM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
They also built a system that watches your engagement with the search results -- if you click on a result and then immediately back out and click something else or revise your query, that original result gets classed as a "short click". If you disappear into the result for several minutes, and then when Google sees you again you're doing something else, then the result gets classed as a "long click". Results which produce long clicks get up-ranked, while results that produce short clicks get down-ranked.
aramaic : How does this not, in the long-term, get hopelessly broken by their habit of putting the answer at the top of the page before even giving search results? Or does me going off and doing something else after they answer me get counted as a long click even though I just closed the browser or started searching for something else entirely instead of clicking on something?
I searched for the population of Nova Scotia the other day and it purported to give me the 2019 answer (prior to search results) based on StatsCan and United Nations data. The StatsCan source was a table of 2016 Census data and the UN data was a "not found" page (and presumably was where they got the 2019 date from?). StatsCan did a Census in 2021 but that information was not apparently involved in the results. The answer was close enough for my purposes but it struck me as odd and I see that sort of thing fairly often in the search results area where they just give you an answer. And I wonder if it's because, by giving you an answer, it's de-emphasizing the sites it previously would have directed you to, somehow, within its algorithm.
posted by joannemerriam at 12:09 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
aramaic : How does this not, in the long-term, get hopelessly broken by their habit of putting the answer at the top of the page before even giving search results? Or does me going off and doing something else after they answer me get counted as a long click even though I just closed the browser or started searching for something else entirely instead of clicking on something?
I searched for the population of Nova Scotia the other day and it purported to give me the 2019 answer (prior to search results) based on StatsCan and United Nations data. The StatsCan source was a table of 2016 Census data and the UN data was a "not found" page (and presumably was where they got the 2019 date from?). StatsCan did a Census in 2021 but that information was not apparently involved in the results. The answer was close enough for my purposes but it struck me as odd and I see that sort of thing fairly often in the search results area where they just give you an answer. And I wonder if it's because, by giving you an answer, it's de-emphasizing the sites it previously would have directed you to, somehow, within its algorithm.
posted by joannemerriam at 12:09 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
> Advanced Search got nuked by the reason everything in Google gets nuked
For what it's worth, Google Advanced Search is still available and functional, it's just not as easy to find as it once was.
posted by Hot Pastrami! at 1:07 PM on October 5, 2023 [9 favorites]
For what it's worth, Google Advanced Search is still available and functional, it's just not as easy to find as it once was.
posted by Hot Pastrami! at 1:07 PM on October 5, 2023 [9 favorites]
That is a very sweeping assertion, extraordinary enough to demand extraordinary evidence.
I must point out that the article itself is making sweeping claims with essentially no evidence.
posted by tavella at 1:27 PM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
I must point out that the article itself is making sweeping claims with essentially no evidence.
posted by tavella at 1:27 PM on October 5, 2023 [6 favorites]
I just love that riding a bike a few miles requires a half hour of research and looking on street view to make sure none of the "sophisticated" mapping apps send you into a death trap.
A problem in my area (LA County) is that the official sources are also out of date; among other issues they show major paths and trails as open that have been closed and locked by the local authorities due to NIMBY complaints (about people encamped on the trail).
posted by snuffleupagus at 1:29 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
A problem in my area (LA County) is that the official sources are also out of date; among other issues they show major paths and trails as open that have been closed and locked by the local authorities due to NIMBY complaints (about people encamped on the trail).
posted by snuffleupagus at 1:29 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
I just wish Apple Maps didn’t look and feel so clunky compared to Google maps (aside from the paid placement of course).
I've been a convert to Apple Maps over the last few years. It sucked for the longest time, and the PR disaster when it first launched didn't help.
But I now use it exclusively when driving, after slow and steady UI and data improvements have made it much more reliable. I still give the edge to Google Maps for walking directions, which for some reason seem to be better, but looking forward to when I can ditch that too.
posted by jeremias at 1:33 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
I've been a convert to Apple Maps over the last few years. It sucked for the longest time, and the PR disaster when it first launched didn't help.
But I now use it exclusively when driving, after slow and steady UI and data improvements have made it much more reliable. I still give the edge to Google Maps for walking directions, which for some reason seem to be better, but looking forward to when I can ditch that too.
posted by jeremias at 1:33 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
@joannemerriam I don't work at Google, but any company that provides a search service must devise ways to collect accurate usage metrics if they hope to make a good product. They need to know where they're succeeding and where they're failing or need improvement. Engagement tracking is an interesting challenge, and there is such a thing as a no-click engagement (at least with the non-google search engine I'm familiar with) specifically to track results that are given in the search suggestion / quick result area before the user has hit Enter. Zero-click engagement metrics are assumptions, since there's no eyeball-tracking component to prove they looked at a specific result, but if the user doesn't refine their search, or doesn't complete the search (because the auto-complete guesses correctly what they wanted), or their next query is completely unrelated, you can conclude with some certainty that the previous query was answered satisfactorily.
posted by pmbuko at 1:49 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by pmbuko at 1:49 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
Google Advanced Search is still available
The old + operator is missing, but has been replaced with quotes:
you can now add quotation marks around a single word to tell Google to match that word precisely. So, if in the past you would have searched for [magazine +latina], you should now search for [magazine "latina"].
posted by Lanark at 1:59 PM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
The old + operator is missing, but has been replaced with quotes:
you can now add quotation marks around a single word to tell Google to match that word precisely. So, if in the past you would have searched for [magazine +latina], you should now search for [magazine "latina"].
posted by Lanark at 1:59 PM on October 5, 2023 [4 favorites]
The Fox audience is the product, in other words, not really the customer. This is a basic fact about ad-supported services.
Untrue. Rather, you're the product regardless of whether you paid for it or not, if a company thinks they can get some other kind of value out of your usage of their service. And if everything on the internet demands that you pay for it, it'll quickly become unusable for unemployed people, and it'll become a web of paid services, all demanding its own portion of your income.
posted by JHarris at 2:01 PM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
Untrue. Rather, you're the product regardless of whether you paid for it or not, if a company thinks they can get some other kind of value out of your usage of their service. And if everything on the internet demands that you pay for it, it'll quickly become unusable for unemployed people, and it'll become a web of paid services, all demanding its own portion of your income.
posted by JHarris at 2:01 PM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
I've been a convert to Apple Maps over the last few years.
I find this varies by location, in built-up cities Google is often still better, but in the countryside or for long trips Apple is now winning.
posted by Lanark at 2:03 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
I find this varies by location, in built-up cities Google is often still better, but in the countryside or for long trips Apple is now winning.
posted by Lanark at 2:03 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
Man a little FTC action lifting a few big tech rocks and suddenly there are mice everywhere!
I'm here for it.
posted by srboisvert at 2:07 PM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
I'm here for it.
posted by srboisvert at 2:07 PM on October 5, 2023 [8 favorites]
Also, to reply to people above who found that Google Maps only shows them what it thinks is the best route: you can drag the route on the map around to get Maps to prioritize different roads, and it'll update the display to accommodate the path you indicate, changing it dynamically as you do so.
This is its own problem with Google, their services have these extra options, like search keywords and interactive route generation, but they're invisible to the user, so they might as well not even be there unless they stumble upon them, or found out how to use them on a FAQ somewhere.
posted by JHarris at 2:13 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
This is its own problem with Google, their services have these extra options, like search keywords and interactive route generation, but they're invisible to the user, so they might as well not even be there unless they stumble upon them, or found out how to use them on a FAQ somewhere.
posted by JHarris at 2:13 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
Say you search for “children’s clothing.” Google converts it, without your knowledge, to a search for “NIKOLAI-brand kidswear,” making a behind-the-scenes substitution of your actual query with a different query that just happens to generate more money for the company, and will generate results you weren’t searching for at all. It’s not possible for you to opt out of the substitution. If you don’t get the results you want, and you try to refine your query, you are wasting your time.
Add me to the skeptical column. It seems to me this is the central claim of the article, and it doesn't match my experience of using Google. In particular, I use it when I'm trying to answer "story ID" queries ("I read this book when i was a kid..."), and while it's certainly true there's a different between unquoted words (where you'll get hits on synonyms) and quoted words (where you won't), I very regularly refine my queries too far and get "no results". And yes, it often offers results for if you'd not refined them so far—it will always respond to zero-hit quoted strings with Results for <your string> (without quotes), for example—I don't remember it ever just feeding me vaguely nearby brand-name-related results no matter how much I narrowed the query.
I want more detail about what exactly Google search is supposedly doing that's nefarious. It's been doing query expansion, like adding "puppy" when you type "dog" forever. Is it now adding "purina" when you type "dog"? How is that different (and noticeably different) from the ads Google already puts at the top of every page of search results?
posted by The Tensor at 3:21 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
Add me to the skeptical column. It seems to me this is the central claim of the article, and it doesn't match my experience of using Google. In particular, I use it when I'm trying to answer "story ID" queries ("I read this book when i was a kid..."), and while it's certainly true there's a different between unquoted words (where you'll get hits on synonyms) and quoted words (where you won't), I very regularly refine my queries too far and get "no results". And yes, it often offers results for if you'd not refined them so far—it will always respond to zero-hit quoted strings with Results for <your string> (without quotes), for example—I don't remember it ever just feeding me vaguely nearby brand-name-related results no matter how much I narrowed the query.
I want more detail about what exactly Google search is supposedly doing that's nefarious. It's been doing query expansion, like adding "puppy" when you type "dog" forever. Is it now adding "purina" when you type "dog"? How is that different (and noticeably different) from the ads Google already puts at the top of every page of search results?
posted by The Tensor at 3:21 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
@JHarris:
It's true, I'm talking about a privileged person's response, and you're right, it has to be in the interest of the private provider to not sell you out.
Until there is luxury communism, it's the only way for some people to escape being made into product.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 3:28 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
It's true, I'm talking about a privileged person's response, and you're right, it has to be in the interest of the private provider to not sell you out.
Until there is luxury communism, it's the only way for some people to escape being made into product.
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 3:28 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
Is it now adding "purina" when you type "dog"? How is that different (and noticeably different) from the ads Google already puts at the top of every page of search results?
Basically, that it's hidden by Google, and we have no way of opting out from it happening. We had to find out about it from a random slide in a court case that Google tried to keep out of visibility. We have no way of knowing if the search query has been modified, so it ends up taking the form of paying for search placement, exactly the kind of thing Google stood adamantly against for two decades.
Although, even if we could opt out, it's awful because it'd probably be the default and most people wouldn't know it's happening in order to turn it off. It's a feature no user in their right mind would want. A user wanting to search for purina is fully capable of doing it themself.
posted by JHarris at 4:00 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
Basically, that it's hidden by Google, and we have no way of opting out from it happening. We had to find out about it from a random slide in a court case that Google tried to keep out of visibility. We have no way of knowing if the search query has been modified, so it ends up taking the form of paying for search placement, exactly the kind of thing Google stood adamantly against for two decades.
Although, even if we could opt out, it's awful because it'd probably be the default and most people wouldn't know it's happening in order to turn it off. It's a feature no user in their right mind would want. A user wanting to search for purina is fully capable of doing it themself.
posted by JHarris at 4:00 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
This probably explains why the boolean 'NOT'/minus operator has stopped working to exclude brands and etc, which low-key enrages me. I wonder if Advanced Search honors them even if they're paid advertisers. Some tinkering is in order.
posted by snuffleupagus at 4:03 PM on October 5, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by snuffleupagus at 4:03 PM on October 5, 2023 [13 favorites]
That is a very sweeping assertion, extraordinary enough to demand extraordinary evidence.
It's very well known and has been widely reported for years. Am excellent somewhat recent example is the NFC payment situation on Android. First, there was Google Wallet. That got killed and people were forced onto Android Pay, which was eventually renamed to Google Pay. Then that team mostly got promoted/moved on and it was replaced with a thing called "GPay" which had been made by a different team for the Indian market. After that got taken global and had replaced the old one, everybody again moved on and now another app called Wallet is the thing.
Nobody owns a project for very long because they have a strong financial incentive to move on and release something new even if it is a duplication of effort. There seems to be nothing that is exempt or even slightly protected. At best there is a decision from upper management that there shall always be a certain kind of app/feature/whatever (generally for competitive reasons), but nobody gives a shit if the particular product is serially replaced for no good reason beyond juicing someone's compensation because they can say they launched a new product.
This is also why things tend to languish for years and years and then suddenly get shut down. Thing launches, most of the team moves on, but a few people can't/won't because they aren't high enough in the stack ranking or want to coast, so minimal maintenance happens. Eventually, the stragglers quit or have a spark of an idea that gets them moved, suddenly there's nobody left to maintain the product, and it gets shut down.
Google is a case study in misaligned incentives and how compensation systems that can work decently well in one part of a business' lifecycle can utterly fail at different points.
posted by wierdo at 4:31 PM on October 5, 2023 [28 favorites]
It's very well known and has been widely reported for years. Am excellent somewhat recent example is the NFC payment situation on Android. First, there was Google Wallet. That got killed and people were forced onto Android Pay, which was eventually renamed to Google Pay. Then that team mostly got promoted/moved on and it was replaced with a thing called "GPay" which had been made by a different team for the Indian market. After that got taken global and had replaced the old one, everybody again moved on and now another app called Wallet is the thing.
Nobody owns a project for very long because they have a strong financial incentive to move on and release something new even if it is a duplication of effort. There seems to be nothing that is exempt or even slightly protected. At best there is a decision from upper management that there shall always be a certain kind of app/feature/whatever (generally for competitive reasons), but nobody gives a shit if the particular product is serially replaced for no good reason beyond juicing someone's compensation because they can say they launched a new product.
This is also why things tend to languish for years and years and then suddenly get shut down. Thing launches, most of the team moves on, but a few people can't/won't because they aren't high enough in the stack ranking or want to coast, so minimal maintenance happens. Eventually, the stragglers quit or have a spark of an idea that gets them moved, suddenly there's nobody left to maintain the product, and it gets shut down.
Google is a case study in misaligned incentives and how compensation systems that can work decently well in one part of a business' lifecycle can utterly fail at different points.
posted by wierdo at 4:31 PM on October 5, 2023 [28 favorites]
That is a very sweeping assertion, extraordinary enough to demand extraordinary evidence
So ... you have clearly not been paying much attention to Google. That is fine, and a perfectly reasonable choice, but perhaps misaligned with the topic at hand.
This is an extremely well-known behavior of theirs, both internally and externally. At least in the US, essentially everyone that is adjacent to the tech industry knows this, unless they're fresh out of college with stars in their eyes and didn't pay much attention to the tech industry as it is, rather than as they imagine it to be. They are literally an example of how NOT to do performance appraisals and promotions, despite their many efforts to appear otherwise (how many MBA books focus on KPIs? Yeah, about that....)
Phrased differently, it's as though you've asked for "extraordinary evidence" for the idea that Amazon treats their workers like shit. Really? Really?
posted by aramaic at 5:04 PM on October 5, 2023 [14 favorites]
So ... you have clearly not been paying much attention to Google. That is fine, and a perfectly reasonable choice, but perhaps misaligned with the topic at hand.
This is an extremely well-known behavior of theirs, both internally and externally. At least in the US, essentially everyone that is adjacent to the tech industry knows this, unless they're fresh out of college with stars in their eyes and didn't pay much attention to the tech industry as it is, rather than as they imagine it to be. They are literally an example of how NOT to do performance appraisals and promotions, despite their many efforts to appear otherwise (how many MBA books focus on KPIs? Yeah, about that....)
Phrased differently, it's as though you've asked for "extraordinary evidence" for the idea that Amazon treats their workers like shit. Really? Really?
posted by aramaic at 5:04 PM on October 5, 2023 [14 favorites]
Some tinkering is in order.
It seems it would be very difficult to impossible to determine this behaviour via individual testing for several reasons not least of which is Google changes results depending on who you are, where you are, what you have searched for both trending and historical. Probably other things that I can't recall.
And in the case of goosing brands in searches you'd have to know which brands were currently paying to be boosted both generally and for your specific demographic. It's no good trying to A/B test for Purina being boosted if Purina isn't paying to have results boosted or you aren't in the demographic they are paying for boosting.
posted by Mitheral at 5:30 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
It seems it would be very difficult to impossible to determine this behaviour via individual testing for several reasons not least of which is Google changes results depending on who you are, where you are, what you have searched for both trending and historical. Probably other things that I can't recall.
And in the case of goosing brands in searches you'd have to know which brands were currently paying to be boosted both generally and for your specific demographic. It's no good trying to A/B test for Purina being boosted if Purina isn't paying to have results boosted or you aren't in the demographic they are paying for boosting.
posted by Mitheral at 5:30 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
That is a very sweeping assertion, extraordinary enough to demand extraordinary evidence
Having worked at a number of large tech companies, this is common among all of them. It's not just Google.
posted by fnerg at 5:36 PM on October 5, 2023 [5 favorites]
Having worked at a number of large tech companies, this is common among all of them. It's not just Google.
posted by fnerg at 5:36 PM on October 5, 2023 [5 favorites]
It seems probable that courts will not be able to rein in Google, which has tried and almost succeeded in censoring public records about its various legal defenses.
In the meantime, however, if there are also analogous "killer apps" in the way of popular searches or search needs that demonstrate how Google is gaming its search and map applications, that seems like something that could help other companies rein it in, where our government cannot or will not.
I'm thinking of Apple, particularly, whose iOS and macOS devices have enough market presence to show how its Maps app doesn't try to replace the question you're asking with one it wants to answer to help sell ads — and Apple doesn't need to, because it sells computers, not advertising.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 5:39 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
In the meantime, however, if there are also analogous "killer apps" in the way of popular searches or search needs that demonstrate how Google is gaming its search and map applications, that seems like something that could help other companies rein it in, where our government cannot or will not.
I'm thinking of Apple, particularly, whose iOS and macOS devices have enough market presence to show how its Maps app doesn't try to replace the question you're asking with one it wants to answer to help sell ads — and Apple doesn't need to, because it sells computers, not advertising.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 5:39 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
Apple makes billions of dollars a year off of advertising.
posted by No One Ever Does at 5:48 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by No One Ever Does at 5:48 PM on October 5, 2023 [2 favorites]
My university-provided corporate email runs on a Google back-end, which forced me to install the Gmail app. I hate it. It had the nice side effect of co-opting the sign in process for my personal account - which I do not now nor have I ever used with the Gmail app - so now I can’t sign in to the email I’ve used since 2004 without opening an app I hate to find a confirmation code. There is no way to fix this that I have found, even with passkeys and external authentication apps already set up and available.
I did think of sending this as a PM, but I thought it might be useful to others. I'm assuming you're using iOS instead of android. You can setup gmail, both personal and education/enterprise versions in any standard mail client using IMAP, such as Mail on the iphone; e.g. you can add a gmail account under iOS settings > mail > accounts (you may need to enable IMAP in the settings of the website version of gmail first). The only downside to this approach is iOS Mail intentionally doesn't support push mail (IMAP IDLE) except for icloud/activesync accounts, so email may not arrive quite as quickly. Other 3rd party mails do not have this limitation.
For two step verification, it will send a prompt to any signed in mobile device first; if you're running iOS, this will apply if you're signed in with your personal account on google apps, like chrome, gmail or youtube etc. You can remove your personal account by e.g.
- On your iPhone or iPad, open the Gmail app .
- In the top right, tap your profile picture.
- Tap Manage accounts on this device.
- Tap 'Remove from this device' by your personal account.
This should only remove your account from google apps on the device, but not from iOS itself. This way you should be able to receive your personal mail in Mail (or another mail app) and use one of your other 2-factor options without getting the prompt in gmail. You can see which devices are signed into google, and will get prompts by going to https://security.google.com, then go to 2-step verification and they'll be listed under 'google prompts'.
You may be able to do the same setup with your university account if they haven't chosen to block using IMAP, and get rid of the gmail app entirely.
I do agree it would be better if you could specify a different 2SV as default instead of a pop-up prompt on a new device, but at least it is substantially more secure than SMS. Once a passkey is setup on a device, you should be able to use that to replace password and 2sv entirely (I do), but it is definitely somewhat experimental yet.
posted by Absolutely No You-Know-What at 5:59 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
I did think of sending this as a PM, but I thought it might be useful to others. I'm assuming you're using iOS instead of android. You can setup gmail, both personal and education/enterprise versions in any standard mail client using IMAP, such as Mail on the iphone; e.g. you can add a gmail account under iOS settings > mail > accounts (you may need to enable IMAP in the settings of the website version of gmail first). The only downside to this approach is iOS Mail intentionally doesn't support push mail (IMAP IDLE) except for icloud/activesync accounts, so email may not arrive quite as quickly. Other 3rd party mails do not have this limitation.
For two step verification, it will send a prompt to any signed in mobile device first; if you're running iOS, this will apply if you're signed in with your personal account on google apps, like chrome, gmail or youtube etc. You can remove your personal account by e.g.
- On your iPhone or iPad, open the Gmail app .
- In the top right, tap your profile picture.
- Tap Manage accounts on this device.
- Tap 'Remove from this device' by your personal account.
This should only remove your account from google apps on the device, but not from iOS itself. This way you should be able to receive your personal mail in Mail (or another mail app) and use one of your other 2-factor options without getting the prompt in gmail. You can see which devices are signed into google, and will get prompts by going to https://security.google.com, then go to 2-step verification and they'll be listed under 'google prompts'.
You may be able to do the same setup with your university account if they haven't chosen to block using IMAP, and get rid of the gmail app entirely.
I do agree it would be better if you could specify a different 2SV as default instead of a pop-up prompt on a new device, but at least it is substantially more secure than SMS. Once a passkey is setup on a device, you should be able to use that to replace password and 2sv entirely (I do), but it is definitely somewhat experimental yet.
posted by Absolutely No You-Know-What at 5:59 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
For bike directions, both Google Maps and Apple Maps are terrible in exciting and different ways.
I have not tried Apple Maps but, yes, Google definitely wants the bike rider side of me dead.
Open Street Map is clunky in its own way, being an under-resourced open source project, but is infinitely better at bike routes, and has been for at least a decade.
posted by deadwax at 6:45 PM on October 5, 2023 [5 favorites]
I have not tried Apple Maps but, yes, Google definitely wants the bike rider side of me dead.
Open Street Map is clunky in its own way, being an under-resourced open source project, but is infinitely better at bike routes, and has been for at least a decade.
posted by deadwax at 6:45 PM on October 5, 2023 [5 favorites]
It seems probable that courts will not be able to rein in Google, which has tried and almost succeeded in censoring public records about its various legal defenses.
They're very much able, that they've chosen not to do something does not make them incapable of that thing. I didn't buy ice cream today. It is not probable that I will not be able to buy ice cream.
posted by Dysk at 9:32 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
They're very much able, that they've chosen not to do something does not make them incapable of that thing. I didn't buy ice cream today. It is not probable that I will not be able to buy ice cream.
posted by Dysk at 9:32 PM on October 5, 2023 [3 favorites]
For bicycling and walking I use the Mapy app (from mapy.cz). It's basically OpenStreetMap with a minimalist interface and navigation. Lately I use it for driving too, even though it lacks traffic delays (outside of Czechia anyway), because it's easy to choose between routes.
There's a toggle for touristic and fast route modes. Touristic mode is useful for cycling and hiking since it avoids the big roads and prefers designated walking or cycling paths.
It doesn't have public transportation so I use a different app for that. But generally, seeing more street names, more roads and paths I much prefer. Where Google Maps will show a big empty dead area with a Starbucks, Mapy/OSM will be full of paths, buildings, alleyways, small roads, parks, etc.
posted by UN at 9:39 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
There's a toggle for touristic and fast route modes. Touristic mode is useful for cycling and hiking since it avoids the big roads and prefers designated walking or cycling paths.
It doesn't have public transportation so I use a different app for that. But generally, seeing more street names, more roads and paths I much prefer. Where Google Maps will show a big empty dead area with a Starbucks, Mapy/OSM will be full of paths, buildings, alleyways, small roads, parks, etc.
posted by UN at 9:39 PM on October 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
>The example given is... weird? There are lots of complaints to make about Google search results but if it were regularly returning items only relating to a specific brand when you made a generic query would be something at least some people had noticed? Have they?
>If anything its biggest problem has long been the opposite - giving general results when you put in specific keywords.
I almost wonder if the changes go in the opposite direction - a lot of different businesses are bidding on keywords like "children's clothing" but how many are bidding on any specific brand name?
Of course, maybe it is some specific high-value brand name and so its competitors are bidding high on those specific keywords because the customers spend a lot of children's clothing and thus are quite valuable, etc.
Regardless of the specifics, the underlying idea is that google knows how much advertisers are bidding for various different specific keywords, and so can tweak people's search keywords slightly so that they exactly match whatever related keyward is currently paying top dollar.
If you did this with enough subtlety, the consumer wouldn't quite realize anything had gone wrong and of course the advertiser is pleased as punch to have found more consumers interested in those specific keywords than anticipated. The only one who is really the wiser is Google, who has gotten 12 cents per click instead of 9 cents or whatever.
Additionally, they might be able to see how much budget different advertisers put behind various specific keywords and which of those advertisers are not getting enough of those specific results to spend their entire budget.
You tweak the direction of keywords away from similar low-paying keywords and towards the higher paying advertiser, helping them spend all of their allotted budget over the run of their adwords purchase.
The interesting thing about these is - whether or not Google is actually doing these exact things in this exact way for this exact reason - these are OBVIOUS ways for online advertisers to bilk both the consumer and the advertiser.
If Google isn't doing it now, they will be eventually, and other advertisers are doing it now.
It's too simple, easy, hidden from sight, and lucrative for it to be otherwise.
posted by flug at 2:34 AM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
>If anything its biggest problem has long been the opposite - giving general results when you put in specific keywords.
I almost wonder if the changes go in the opposite direction - a lot of different businesses are bidding on keywords like "children's clothing" but how many are bidding on any specific brand name?
Of course, maybe it is some specific high-value brand name and so its competitors are bidding high on those specific keywords because the customers spend a lot of children's clothing and thus are quite valuable, etc.
Regardless of the specifics, the underlying idea is that google knows how much advertisers are bidding for various different specific keywords, and so can tweak people's search keywords slightly so that they exactly match whatever related keyward is currently paying top dollar.
If you did this with enough subtlety, the consumer wouldn't quite realize anything had gone wrong and of course the advertiser is pleased as punch to have found more consumers interested in those specific keywords than anticipated. The only one who is really the wiser is Google, who has gotten 12 cents per click instead of 9 cents or whatever.
Additionally, they might be able to see how much budget different advertisers put behind various specific keywords and which of those advertisers are not getting enough of those specific results to spend their entire budget.
You tweak the direction of keywords away from similar low-paying keywords and towards the higher paying advertiser, helping them spend all of their allotted budget over the run of their adwords purchase.
The interesting thing about these is - whether or not Google is actually doing these exact things in this exact way for this exact reason - these are OBVIOUS ways for online advertisers to bilk both the consumer and the advertiser.
If Google isn't doing it now, they will be eventually, and other advertisers are doing it now.
It's too simple, easy, hidden from sight, and lucrative for it to be otherwise.
posted by flug at 2:34 AM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
One of my annoyances with Google Maps is how they apparently allow anyone to claim a business name and address wherever they want without any verification.
I had (for work reasons) located a number of telco facilities on Google Maps. Many of those addresses show businesses which I know don't exist at those sites.
I understand this is a SEO thing - if you're searching for a locksmith (for example), a locksmith physical close to your location will be given priority in the search. There are probably other motivations for claiming bogus addresses.
I don't get Google's indifference to this casual fraud.
posted by rochrobbb at 3:42 AM on October 6, 2023 [7 favorites]
I had (for work reasons) located a number of telco facilities on Google Maps. Many of those addresses show businesses which I know don't exist at those sites.
I understand this is a SEO thing - if you're searching for a locksmith (for example), a locksmith physical close to your location will be given priority in the search. There are probably other motivations for claiming bogus addresses.
I don't get Google's indifference to this casual fraud.
posted by rochrobbb at 3:42 AM on October 6, 2023 [7 favorites]
This probably explains why the boolean 'NOT'/minus operator has stopped working to exclude brands and etc, which low-key enrages me.
Oh, THIS explains why fucking *Pinterest* is back in every goddamn search I make now. Thanks.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:42 AM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
Oh, THIS explains why fucking *Pinterest* is back in every goddamn search I make now. Thanks.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:42 AM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
I still find Google Maps tremendously useful. The only way it has become less useful is that it doesn't suggest/autocomplete destinations...and always offers the passive-aggressive "tip" that if I relaxed my data privacy settings it might help out a little more. Unfortunately, I integrated so much of my digital life with Google products several years back that I'm going to have a hard time moving away from them. It's funny because I'd moved definitely into Android products by then, and my reasoning for seeking out Google products was the company was large enough that products wouldn't disappear all the time the way so many start-up tech companies did. That was a mistake, obviously. (But I do remember a time when I'd receive a tech-y gift, put it aside for a year because I didn't want to figure out how it worked, and come back to discover that the company had either died or been bought out by another startup that I'd never heard of. Also unpleasant!)
Anyway, I believe this article because Google has even become less useful for shopping. Even purposely spending money sucks now! In the old days, you could just skip over the "suggested" searches which were clearly advertisements. Now the actual results are poor. If they're manipulating the actual search results for money, that makes a lot of sense.
posted by grandiloquiet at 9:26 AM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
Anyway, I believe this article because Google has even become less useful for shopping. Even purposely spending money sucks now! In the old days, you could just skip over the "suggested" searches which were clearly advertisements. Now the actual results are poor. If they're manipulating the actual search results for money, that makes a lot of sense.
posted by grandiloquiet at 9:26 AM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
Interesting thread. Yeah I find that Google search results these days are often less relevant or on-point... but I maybe need to up my search game. Things to try...
Right now we're sitting on the patio of our hotel in Colmar (France), and I'm using Google maps to spot things to do/see, using a $150 8" tablet... and Holy Shit, the capabilities we now have. And that we demand: in our previous hotel in Paris, the free wifi went down and suddenly we couldn't research or book anything. Anyway, I remember life before Google, so I'm still inclined to be pleased with most of what Google hath wrought, and that maybe they have just drifted into too big and a little stupid, as opposed to evil. Compare with Facebook...
Google Maps was pretty useful in Paris, except for transit... but the city had their own excellent websites and apps. Back home I regularly use Google maps to research bike routes or towns we'd like to visit. I don't like or trust most routing recommendations; I like to pick my own course from maps.
I guess my point is that I think Google has been a leader in developing the capabilities that make the internet useful, much of it is arguably still for free, give or take some ads, so I'm inclined to cut them some slack. I've learned what works, what's flaky and what's sponsor-distorted.
I would consider paying Google monthly for an upgrade:
- enhanced, non-sponsor-distorted search and maps
- curated advertising based on expressed preferences and the ability to flag offensive or uninteresting ads that will never be served to me again.
I wish they'd consider this.
In my experiments with ChatGPT, I found that a well-structured question could produce search results that would have taken several steps in a straight web search, and I think this is the future, and would possibly blunt some of the distortions of sponsorship.
posted by Artful Codger at 9:40 AM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
Right now we're sitting on the patio of our hotel in Colmar (France), and I'm using Google maps to spot things to do/see, using a $150 8" tablet... and Holy Shit, the capabilities we now have. And that we demand: in our previous hotel in Paris, the free wifi went down and suddenly we couldn't research or book anything. Anyway, I remember life before Google, so I'm still inclined to be pleased with most of what Google hath wrought, and that maybe they have just drifted into too big and a little stupid, as opposed to evil. Compare with Facebook...
Google Maps was pretty useful in Paris, except for transit... but the city had their own excellent websites and apps. Back home I regularly use Google maps to research bike routes or towns we'd like to visit. I don't like or trust most routing recommendations; I like to pick my own course from maps.
I guess my point is that I think Google has been a leader in developing the capabilities that make the internet useful, much of it is arguably still for free, give or take some ads, so I'm inclined to cut them some slack. I've learned what works, what's flaky and what's sponsor-distorted.
I would consider paying Google monthly for an upgrade:
- enhanced, non-sponsor-distorted search and maps
- curated advertising based on expressed preferences and the ability to flag offensive or uninteresting ads that will never be served to me again.
I wish they'd consider this.
In my experiments with ChatGPT, I found that a well-structured question could produce search results that would have taken several steps in a straight web search, and I think this is the future, and would possibly blunt some of the distortions of sponsorship.
posted by Artful Codger at 9:40 AM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
This is apparently the slide that shows the query rewriting referred to in the Wired article: https://twitter.com/adamkovac/status/1710041764910846061
It looks to me like that is query rewriting to improve ad matching that has no effect on organic search results, which would mean a misunderstanding led to a story that wasn't true but most of the internet probably believes is true now.
There's lots wrong with Google, and the tech industry, but when there's a bombshell, viral story that feeds perfectly into your prejudices, that's a story you need to look at very closely.
posted by jjwiseman at 12:10 PM on October 6, 2023 [10 favorites]
It looks to me like that is query rewriting to improve ad matching that has no effect on organic search results, which would mean a misunderstanding led to a story that wasn't true but most of the internet probably believes is true now.
There's lots wrong with Google, and the tech industry, but when there's a bombshell, viral story that feeds perfectly into your prejudices, that's a story you need to look at very closely.
posted by jjwiseman at 12:10 PM on October 6, 2023 [10 favorites]
Wired has pulled the article from the original post at this point.
posted by StarkRoads at 3:34 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by StarkRoads at 3:34 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
This is apparently the slide that shows the query rewriting referred to in the Wired article: https://twitter.com/adamkovac/status/1710041764910846061
Curious to know how the material in this slide differs from evidence presented in court, which is what the writer had referred to and discussed in their piece.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 4:26 PM on October 6, 2023
Curious to know how the material in this slide differs from evidence presented in court, which is what the writer had referred to and discussed in their piece.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 4:26 PM on October 6, 2023
Fucking-a why can't we just have computers that do what we tell them to?
How does that generate profit
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:54 PM on October 6, 2023
How does that generate profit
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:54 PM on October 6, 2023
It's a shame wired pulled the article — unfortunately it looks like the editors didn't quite get what the issue was.
The writer of the article wrote about google allegedly manipulating pricing for ads.
The press release from Google linked above does a switcheroo and defends their organic search results.
The slide however is indeed about advertisements.
They didn't even deny that they use this practice for ad results — so we can pretty much assume that they do.
posted by UN at 9:08 PM on October 6, 2023
The writer of the article wrote about google allegedly manipulating pricing for ads.
The press release from Google linked above does a switcheroo and defends their organic search results.
The slide however is indeed about advertisements.
They didn't even deny that they use this practice for ad results — so we can pretty much assume that they do.
posted by UN at 9:08 PM on October 6, 2023
Curious to know how the material in this slide differs from evidence presented in court, which is what the writer had referred to and discussed in their piece.
It looks a lot like that slide is one of the pieces of evidence presented in court. Specifically, it is the one the linked article was based on (though the linked article either misunderstands the contents of the slide, or intentionally juices it so much as to make it a lie).
The press release from Google linked above does a switcheroo and defends their organic search results.
The slide however is indeed about advertisements.
They didn't even deny that they use this practice for ad results — so we can pretty much assume that they do.
The article very much said that they were doing this for your search queries, not for advertising keywords. This isn't a switcheroo. Google "didn't even deny it" because it's something they have been very open about for ages. It also doesn't seem particularly controversial, and for good reason? Like, if you search "children's clothing" and a company has broad matching on those keywords, it might show you ads for a specific kids' clothing company that has intentionally chosen to go for broad keyword matching. The horror!
posted by Dysk at 9:23 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
It looks a lot like that slide is one of the pieces of evidence presented in court. Specifically, it is the one the linked article was based on (though the linked article either misunderstands the contents of the slide, or intentionally juices it so much as to make it a lie).
The press release from Google linked above does a switcheroo and defends their organic search results.
The slide however is indeed about advertisements.
They didn't even deny that they use this practice for ad results — so we can pretty much assume that they do.
The article very much said that they were doing this for your search queries, not for advertising keywords. This isn't a switcheroo. Google "didn't even deny it" because it's something they have been very open about for ages. It also doesn't seem particularly controversial, and for good reason? Like, if you search "children's clothing" and a company has broad matching on those keywords, it might show you ads for a specific kids' clothing company that has intentionally chosen to go for broad keyword matching. The horror!
posted by Dysk at 9:23 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
If they're not doing it, then that's great. Google not being as evil as they could be. I am happy to be wrong.
But let's not also pretend that people weren't right to be concerned, at this late stage of the game, by the news.
And let's not also be blind to the fact that Google being so secretive doesn't mean we don't have to jump onto stories that would seem to indicate shitty practices. It's not like there's not plenty of other things Google is doing badly these days, one more really isn't out of character these days, hmm?
I'm sure there are people in Google who still believe in the idealistic mission of their early years. May they win out in the end.
posted by JHarris at 6:02 AM on October 7, 2023
But let's not also pretend that people weren't right to be concerned, at this late stage of the game, by the news.
And let's not also be blind to the fact that Google being so secretive doesn't mean we don't have to jump onto stories that would seem to indicate shitty practices. It's not like there's not plenty of other things Google is doing badly these days, one more really isn't out of character these days, hmm?
I'm sure there are people in Google who still believe in the idealistic mission of their early years. May they win out in the end.
posted by JHarris at 6:02 AM on October 7, 2023
I think the lesson from this story isn't that "Well, Google is so bad it could have been true." It's closer to "conspiracy theories spread when people accept stories uncritically because they fit their beliefs." Which isn't denying that Google has done bad & illegal things, but that's pretty much always how conspiracy theories start--they resonate with preexisting beliefs or uncertainties and often capitalize on plausibilities. You could argue it's in character for all sorts of things, but the fact that this story turned out to be false should alert you to how well that strategy actually predicts the facts.
posted by jjwiseman at 9:45 AM on October 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
posted by jjwiseman at 9:45 AM on October 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
ban search.
𝕥𝕙𝕚𝕤 𝕙𝕒𝕤 𝕓𝕖𝕖𝕟 𝕪𝕣 𝕓.𝕝.𝕡. 𝕗𝕠𝕣 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕕𝕒𝕪
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 4:25 PM on October 7, 2023
𝕥𝕙𝕚𝕤 𝕙𝕒𝕤 𝕓𝕖𝕖𝕟 𝕪𝕣 𝕓.𝕝.𝕡. 𝕗𝕠𝕣 𝕥𝕙𝕖 𝕕𝕒𝕪
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 4:25 PM on October 7, 2023
Just following up on my earlier comment re Google search and maps. Now that we've been using it alot for a week while traveling, my current biggest criticism would be that the results are neither consistent nor exhaustive. You can search an area for restaurants, but it seems that it won't give you all the restaurants that meet the search criteria, and the same search might give a slightly different result set hours later.
posted by Artful Codger at 12:26 PM on October 9, 2023
posted by Artful Codger at 12:26 PM on October 9, 2023
I've read that Google conducts a more or less instantaneous auction to place ads when the search query is entered.
That would explain the lack of consistency as well as the failure to be exhaustive.
posted by jamjam at 1:42 PM on October 9, 2023
That would explain the lack of consistency as well as the failure to be exhaustive.
posted by jamjam at 1:42 PM on October 9, 2023
« Older All Forza Drivers, Start your Engines | The 2023 Nobel Prize in Literature goes to Jon... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Are there other search engines that are resisting enshittification better?
posted by Popular Ethics at 9:55 PM on October 4, 2023 [11 favorites]