The trump admin is extremely soft on crime.

“hello ladies and gentlemen I am the spiffing brit and welcome to LAX Air Traffic control”

Selling to consumers is charity at this point. They are such a tiny portion of the market. Consumer will lose always unless regulations step in.

Witg finite supply casual users will lose against people using computers to make money.

Nah thats correct kurzgesagt is slop

Thats not what I’m arguing. I’m saying most people dont care enough either way and based off research and polling ive seen that most people do use the features. So if most people use them and only a tiny fraction wants them gone you should keep them default and give those people a toggle.

When I’m saying 175k out of 100m I’m pointing out that its a tiny % of the user base. The people who were engaged enough to vote in that poll were the anti AI people. It was posted to all the anti AI subreddits and twitter feeds. It was a big call to action to try and prove no one wants it.

Its obviously where search is heading which is why ddg mentions in their blogs that they are working heavily on AI features. They have always been receptive to users so unlike google so they do give users the option to disable. If they had data that most were disabling we’d see that be the default.

How do you know? Im sure 1% do

No search will ever give you the correct answer 100% of the time so I dont know why you’d draw such a dumb line in the sand.

I mean unless you dont use search engines, don’t use libraries, don’t talk to humans.

This stat is people who use llm chatbots for search. It excludes summaries. I think that had 60% saying they did read the summaries 10% saying not sure and rest saying they didnt.

Can someone articulate what is wrong with this? It intrinsically feels wrong to me, but when I think about it I dont really have any good reasoning why this would be bad.

We expect a standard price and it feels bad when we find out someone else got it cheaper.

But the consumer should be operating the same, they review the deal and if its a price they are willing to pay they go through with it.

People are intentionally going to LLM chatbots to search. This is not including viewing of AI summaries as AI search.

DDG provides both because its what users expect from a search engine now.

Maybe im to tech-brained but I dont think its a technical barrier. I think that they just dont care enough. One search of “how to remove AI from DDG” would bring it up but they never care about the issue enough to take that first step.

I sometimes observe this with my family members, who will complain “oh I dont like how it does X” and I say you can turn that off in the settings and then they dont. It was a minor complain they had but not an actual complain they wanted to solve.

Maybe DDG should do the firefox route of a popup to disable all AI for new users.

Yes that is a good sample size but its biased by the people weighing in caring most about the issue. If it was 175000 users sampled randomly from the DDG user base then yes it would be a good predictor but it wasnt.

Im not making that assumption at all.

I checked again to get a more up to date report and so that we actually have something to go off instead of my memory of some random reports. Pew finds 50% of people use chatbots and the most common use is searching for information. Also in the report the have a stat for reading AI summaries at the top of a search and that is 60% say that have, 10% dont know and 30% dont read it. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2026/06/17/americans-and-ai-2026-chatbots-smart-devices-and-views-on-impact/

So its fair to say I was wrong and its not over 50% but its close to 50%.

None of what ive said is AI generated. You’re just a moron.

Removed by mod

Do you think its because there is a lot more spam and SEO than 10 years ago or do you think google is actively doing something to remove relevant results from searches?

People have said that and ive read a few studies. Its a truism because the search quality degraded but mostly due to SEO and link spam. If someone wants to post actual evidence of google “actively making search worse” I’d love to read it. So far i only saw that it was due to SEO spam which affects all search providers. While people here are trying to claim it was done nefariously to force people towards AI.

I dont think AI summary is ever going to be something people NEED. In most cases its better and it will cover majority of searches but its unlikely to cover 100% of cases. You will always need to be able to find things on the web like links.

AI in other areas its not even looking bad for workers. Its largely overhyped from what I see. Programming seems the most useful field but even then its like x0.1 or x0.2 boost in efficiency. This year it got much better. Maybe things will change next year I’ll have to see.

You can’t discuss it because you have no coherent reasoning behind why you arrived at your position. You are a reactionary who knows very little and parrots what you hear.

If you dont want to use AI fine but you’re wasting your time trying to discuss it when you have nothing about it to discuss. This is a technology community not an anti AI schzio ranting community.

Make the argument as to why its not suitable.