• cerement@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    172
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    for many years now – stopped using them back when they started to ignore +include, -exclude, and “phrases”

    • Blizzard@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It was a necessary move to incorporate support for Google+ profiles. /s

    • gibmiser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      10 months ago

      So wait, the search operators don’t work anymore? It seemed like it but is that confirmed?

      • Carnelian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        67
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        They still work as intended actually, but most pages are so inundated with SEO garble that they’re effectively useless

        • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          10 months ago

          And if it limits the results too much they just ignore them to cram more ads in.

          Can’t have the bottom of the page spelling gogle.

        • tool@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          They really don’t, though. Inclusion/exclusion operators work most of the time, but it’ll still return results with explicitly-excluded keywords. It also fucks up results by returning entries with similar words to your query, even when you double-quote a part of the search term. Advanced queries that use booleans and logical AND/OR don’t work at all anymore, that functionality has been completely removed. It returns what it thinks you want, not what you actually want, even when explicitly crafting a query to be as specific as possible.

          I use Kagi for search now and it’s 1000x better, especially when researching technical issues; it’s like when Google actually respected your search terms and query as a whole.

          • Carnelian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            To be clear, we’re talking about the actual search results themselves and not labelled advertisements or any of google’s godawful widgets that take up half the first page?

            Do you have an example of a search that returns excluded keywords?

            Not trying to be confrontational lol I’m genuinely curious. There was an article I think last year where they demonstrated that everything was still working, but pages essentially just embedded thousands of keywords which effectively ruined the system

      • Atemu@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        They still work but they search the entire page, not just what’s visible in your browser. A search for "term" does not implicate you being able to find term on the results’ rendered pages.

        • Neato@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          10 months ago

          So pages are just including every relevant term hidden somewhere like they making resumes in the early aughts with 4pt white text with bullshit at the bottom?

          • underisk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            A popular SEO trick around 15 years ago was to put a bunch of search terms in a heading tag near the top of your page markup and just style it to minimize its appearance, because if you completely hid it google would penalize your pagerank score. They test for visibility but it’s difficult to do so in a foolproof and futureproof way so there’s likely a similar technique still seeing some limited use today.

            It’s far less effective or straightforward than the modern prevailing SEO strategy; which is using generative AI that have been trained on all the top-ranked pages to produce exactly what google likes and ranks highly. Which has a knock-on effect of causing all these AIs to start eating themselves by training on pages produced by AI, like a kind of human-centipede ouroboros.

      • frosty99c@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think you can still use the operators if you select “verbatim” under “search tools.” On mobile, you need to scroll to the right past images/videos/news/etc

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Yes. If you do a search on this site for posts about google, you’ll find multiple threads about this. Basically it seems that google is losing the arms race against SEO, and new LLM bots are mostly responsible.

    • Rayspekt@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      10 months ago

      Basically it seems that google is losing the arms race against SEO[…]

      What does this mean in particular?

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        51
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Companies are better at getting their shitty product/spammy pages to the top of search results than Google is able to find high quality pages to show you.

        Google has to create algorithms to judge pages based on their content and get good results , companies only have to fine tune their pages to match the algorithm.

        • GustavoFring@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          10 months ago

          IIRC Google penalizes sites if they are detected to be abusing the SEO system. Not sure how effective the detection is though.

          • pacmondo
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            28
            ·
            10 months ago

            Poor, if my google search results are anything to go by

          • idunnololz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It’s actually very tricky to implement because people have used it to do “negative SEO”. Which is essentially making it seem like your competitors are abusing the system to get their results lowered.

      • Thorry84@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        10 months ago

        People with mediocre content using SEO to get themselves higher in the search results than sites with actual information on them. That way when searching for something you need to dig through the shit to get to the nugget of actual useful info.

        Search engines tried to rank pages based on how big the chance is the info the user is looking for is actually on that page. SEO makes it so that pages with a lower chance of containing the right info, are ranked before pages with a higher chance. This leads those pages to get more hits and thus marketing thinks it’s done their job. But in reality it just pisses off users, blaming the dumb sites that do this and more often the search engine. Search engines are trying to fight this, but SEO is big business, so they are losing the battle.

        Now these days there are more issues, like search engines not having access to a lot of info in so called walled gardens. So more good info gets created in places where it can’t easily be found. Also search engines have become more and more advertisement machines instead of search engines and with this shift in priorities, the user experience deteriorates.

        But yeah SEO sucks and has always sucked.

      • gibmiser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        Search Engine Optimization. Not providing the best search result, but tricking the search engine into thinking you have the best result.

      • nottelling@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        It means if you search for anything, your first 3 pages of hits are the same useless websites that exist to push ads vaguely related to your search rather than real info. Trying to research a broken TV used to return things like AVForums or reddit threads or samsung support sites. Now it’s “TEN BEST TV’s IN 2024” that are nothing but sponsored content and affiliate links to tvs on amazon.

        Google can’t figure out how to tell the difference between the former and the latter, and isn’t motivated to because they get paid for the ad clicks, and not for the forum clicks.

      • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        If google detected continuing searching after a page visit, then that page you looked at was probably not having the right answer, right?

        SEO solution : make super long pages with the history of what you are looking for and adding mumbo jumbo stuff to bloat out the page so you stay there longer. Now google thinks you found what you looked for.

        And a lot of other crap ofc.

        • Rayspekt@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          Ahhh, that’s the goal behind those overly long explanations about how Jimbo Jimboson invented the spoon when I just want to look up soup recipies.

      • vexikron@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        SEO stands for Search Engine Optimization.

        The technicals of all the ways this is done nowadays are complicated, but basically SEO itself is now a pretty huge industry, just website owners paying SEO companies to show up higher in search results.

        Basically the scenario we are now in is that companies that can afford to game and manipulate the way google’s search algorithm works in terms of prioritizing ‘relevance’, ie, what you see first, have been so successful at this that it has essentially ruined the ability to find any website that cannot afford to do so.

        This would be something like 99.999% of existing websites are going to be much harder to find without going through pages and pages of results, whereas a tiny number of websites that can afford massive SEO are going to show up on the first page, as well as in search results for search terms they are barely related to at all.

      • rtxn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        SEO (search engine “optimization”) is how a search engine ranks its results. The more webpages link to a certain result (as determined by a webcrawler), the higher it is displayed. That is why bloggers are often paid by bad actors to publish editorials that link to a scam, virus, or gambling website.

        Google popularized the concept in its early years, back when SEO was an organic indicator of a result’s popularity. It made them the single best choice. Then, capitalism happened, and SEO became a resource to exploit.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bARSNVobUk

    • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      Google chose to ignore the SEO arms race. Winning it is trivial, if you detect anything even remotely grey-hat, blacklist the entire domain. Forever. Then SEO stops being a thing because no one wants to risk toeing the line.

    • ThunderWhiskers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      What incentive does Google have to even put up a fight? Worse results = more time searching = more “traffic” = more ad revenue. It’s not like they really have to worry about search engine competitors. Please do not try to recommend DDG to me. It is just a different flavor of garbage.

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Yes, there’s a great article I read a while back about how and why recipe web sites became so bad and frustrating. Basically, a good website would show you the recipe, you would read it and leave. However, since you didn’t spend much time on the site, google would rank it much lower.

        On the other hand, if you encountered a long rambling story that you had to read through and scroll through ads, before getting to the useful information, then google would rank the site higher because you spent more time on it. That’s why there are so many memes about how bad recipe website are.

        And of course, even before LLMs, it was trivial to implement a copy paste bot to create a massive number of web sites.

  • Krudler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I live in central Canada.

    I am reading the comments, and I am noticing that other people’s experiences are very different than mine.

    For me, Google Search has reached the point where it will not even give me results for my search terms. I say this without an iota of hyperbole.

    It’s so coincidental that this conversation comes up, but I actually sat there yesterday agog, looking at my desktop Firefox browser window… Scrolling through the entire search results page and realizing that not a single thing was even close to what I searched

    It is noteworthy because I have been observing a steady decline, but it was the very first time I could make use of literally nothing that they gave back. In an unsettling way, the gravity of it hit me emotionally right there.

      • Krudler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Don’t associate ME with those banjo-pickin’ inbreds.

        edit: I had referred to the people of Saskatchewan as a bunch of banjo-pickin’ inbreds. I was wrong to make such a statement, and I’d like to apologize. The vast majority of the people in Saskatchewan have no idea how to play the banjo.

      • IronKrill@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        This reads like an incoherent AI-generated rambling. I’m sorry if you actually have a point you’re trying to make, but all I see is broken English, lack of direction, and an unrelated link at the end. If you are in fact not a bot, then please slow down and quality check before posting.

  • Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    10 months ago

    Google search was so legendary when it came out, it was able to find me perfect results when I would even type in almost gibberish, it somehow predicted what I actually meant. Over time the results were worse and worse, then nothing but products would show in the results a few years ago. Buy this, buy what,etc. no more research, just trash products in the search results. Google greed killed itself.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ars had an article about it: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/01/google-search-is-losing-the-fight-with-seo-spam-study-says/

    It’s not just you—Google Search is getting worse. A new study from Leipzig University, Bauhaus-University Weimar, and the Center for Scalable Data Analytics and Artificial Intelligence looked at Google search quality for a year and found the company is losing the war against SEO (Search Engine Optimization) spam.

    They’re also not particularly motivated to try harder. They don’t have a lot of competition, and they make a lot of money this way. And their leadership are idiots.

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      They also can’t. The algorithm is a black box to them, so figuring out why a given SEO tactic works is a fool’s errand.

      It’s a cat and mouse game, where a working tactic will rapidly proliferate.

  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yeah, the first measurements are rolling in and not looking great: https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/17/google_search_results_spam/

    Basically, imagine someone built a machine that made it trivial to generate an infinite number of realistic-looking articles (=LLMs). And there’s a monetary incentive to do so (=ad money).
    So, I have to imagine, all search engines are absolutely being blasted with spam content, and they have to filter out realistic-looking articles to make their search results worthwhile at all, but as a result, some real search results will also get filtered out or ranked badly.

    • Flumpkin@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Huh. I hate advertising and think it’s brainwashing that harms our minds, increases consumerism and causes massive environmental damage and biases all content and news production.

      Affiliate links are just another form of advertising.

      So the solution is very easy, outlaw affiliate links. Or advertising in general. Amazon and others should no longer be allowed to offer affiliate systems. Or remove any page with affiliate page or linking to pages with affiliate pages from search results.

      You can’t create rules and structures that prioritize profit and expect positive results.

  • iterable
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Not just Google. Duck duck go was good for awhile but now also getting worse. Assume this is Ai and other tools screwing with how their web crawlers collect data. Expect it to get worse before it gets better.

    • Flumpkin@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      DDG recently started to exclude terms from my search query and returns more random garbage and a “search only …” link. So often I search, find nothing, then realize DDG messed up again. Really not sure why it’s doing that.

    • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      General intelligence slowly taking over, curating everything to the point we won’t be able to tell that it needs to be unplugged when the time comes.

      But I enjoy the content it gives me about the content I don’t like being incorrect. And I’ll be damned if I ever say I wish I was born 30 years earlier.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I don’t say this to be dismissive, but Google’s search results have been getting worse for the better part of a decade now, and they’re still far above anyone else. While I do think that engines like Bing are closer to Google’s quality than most give them credit for, Google is still the only game in town. There are other search engines that people use, but they are niches in niches, and are probably used for belief reasons over an improvement in quality.

    Frankly, I think that for the first time in history, the search market is open for competition. There is an argument to be made whether Google either doesn’t care about their search quality, or that it’s simply a hard problem to solve for anyone. If the former is true, then a competitor could make a very real case for overthrowing Google, given the right backing and hype behind them.

    • Routhinator@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The rate at which the results got worse has a notable pattern in line with their drive for ad revenue. Most of the results are garbage because they are driven by money rather than user choice and popularity. The more money you pour into tuning SEO and Google Ads the higher you rank. To hell with relevance or what users actually want.

      I ran a web community for writers from 1997 onward, and threw in the towel this year. The site had a core following but we relied on a steady trickle of new users from organic search and word of mouth to stay afloat. And little by little no matter how much time I put into SEO and the site we continued to slide due to a combination of seo rank and google just removing pages without explanation or reason. After spending the last 5 years rebuilding the site for SEO and mobile optimization, I watched google index 99% of the sitemap, our rank come back up slightly, new users starting to come in… And then it just… Stopped. I went to check the indexing, and google had silently moved all the indexed pages back to “crawled but not indexed” for no bloody reason. Zero errors, codes or messages.

      I threw in the towel. The site was costing me nearly $500usd a month to operate and I could not throw a dime at ads. I had tried getting ad revenue on the site a few years back even though I did not want ads on the site and it looked promising… I got 90% of the way to covering monthly costs, but before the first cheque was cut google banned me from that service with no explanation. I followed every rule, discouraged regular members from clicking ads unless they really wanted to see the thing the ad was showing. Still got banned. And google just doesn’t even care to explain themselves.

      I closed the site in January because I realized the internet I fell in love with, the one I created that community for… Its dead. Killed by capitalism.

      Might be for the best. I can throw my coding time at open-source projects now. Just need to find one that entices me.

      • hazeebabee@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Thats so sad, especially as someone who regularly tries to find small forums like that. But i always have such a hard time finding them unless i already know the site name :(

        Its so hard now for a regular person to find content made by other people without it being tarnished by the profit motive. Forums are all pretty much on reddit or dead. Even a good blog that isnt just seo trash is hard to find now days. Social media sites are mostly influencers trying to sell products and attract followers.

        I just wanna see the cool stuff other humans are doing and thinking without ads and low effort garbage 🥺

        • Routhinator@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I wont lie, it hurt to shut The Den of Amateur Writing down. That place was a product of the heart. So many good memories.

      • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s heartbreaking but not an uncommon story - it does seem like Google has the power of life and death over websites and it seems very fickle and opaque.

        Have you thought about restarting it on the Fediverse?

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, it’s not so much that the search results declined, but that the spammy content farms really got the hang of SEO and now all the results are shit and they all have one thing in common in that they’re covered in ads. Google does have an incentive in giving you links filled with their ads, but I’m not convinced that is responsible for the mountains of shit sites. And LLMs are only going to make this worse.

      Google got outsmarted. I feel like there’s maybe a few dozen companies where if you blocked all their sites, your search results would improve massively.

    • BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      What is a good search engine these days? I use DuckDuckGo but I don’t find it’s very sensitive to local content, like if I’m looking up an obituary I end up switching to Google. Any more precise and privacy oriented search engines?

      • imapuppetlookaway@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        I just started using this one today: https://docs.searxng.org/ and it did a great job for what i needed. I never heard of it before, but found the link on an old Lemmy post.

        I don’t know how it would work for other people with other needs, but i needed to find graphic designers to help me with a project. DuckDuckGo kept giving me hundreds of results from a handful of big companies, but i wanted small companies and individuals. Found exactly what i needed on the first search using this engine.

  • Baggie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    10 months ago

    In general yes. I’m not going to pull exact numbers up but I think it started declining around 2018.

    I’ve heard it said they switched to whatever was most profitable rather than what was actually useful or relevant. I still find good results when looking up niche tech issues, but if it’s more mainstream I get really weird results, so that might indeed be what’s happening.

    • Thorry84@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      10 months ago

      Looking up niche stuff gets harder and harder it seems. It always seems to “translate” my very specific request into a very general search and giving me useless results. It highlights search terms in the results, which aren’t even in my original search query. Google just thinks it knows better and it never ever does.

  • Nikls94@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Also, google images sucks now. Try googling for anything specific, like “sand in pc” or “red carb on plate” - all AI generated

    • TangledHyphae@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      How can you tell? Do you think it’s on purpose, or just the result of so much AI art being pumped into the interwebs for the last year?

      • Nikls94@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I have absolutely no idea. But I’ve found out that, the more specific of an image you search for, the higher the chance of it being AI-generated.

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yes. I’m using the same search methods I’ve always used that used to get me relevant results, and I get a bunch of fucking sponsored links instead. I’ve noticed lately that if the result of a search is a YouTube video and I click on it, it doesn’t go to YouTube but opens up as a search result and plays me ads somehow bypassing my adblocker that works just fine in actual YouTube. More than once after the ad was done, the video refused to load, which was utterly infuriating.

    Google assistant on my phone has also become garbage. They changed the functionality of the few key things I liked to use, and now it’s totally useless to me. Google is swirling down the shitter faster than yesterdays tacos. Honestly, if it wasn’t for email, photos, and using an Android phone, I’d probably be done with them entirely.

      • Scrollone@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Also switch to Firefox, it has built-in protections that Google Chrome (of course) doesn’t have

        • Yer Ma@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          No, it does not. I end up installing Firefox multiple times a week and it takes less than a minute to add uBlock origin ande enable all the extra filters that it offers

          • XiELEd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            When I was new to using uBlock it took me a while to search and read what to do. It definitely took me more than a minute to watch the tutorial video that was linked from the Github. It just sucks when people share these unrealistic expectations with total newbies. I was on the receiving end, too. I just installed it without knowing how to set it up properly, and I kept on hearing “Hard Mode” without knowing that you can actually do it on mobile.

            If you say that it takes 20 seconds to install and nothing more, you’re just encouraging someone to just install it and expect it to be the only thing you have to do. You’re not even telling them that you had to configure it to totally block social media trackers and ads on websites!

            And ffs, this place is becoming like reddit. I’m being downvoted just because I said something that would’ve been realistic for someone who is new to uBlock, that it has to be set-up and it will take a while.

              • XiELEd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                There is another comment that said their default settings still let an ad slip in. Same thing happened to me before enabling Dynamic Filtering, then found out some trackers and ad servers are persistent. Plus, hard mode allows you to block trackers more.

    • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      You can get a degoogled phone but they all seem under par with flagships.

      I was looking at the fairphone5 but I’m on the fence. I might just stick with my current phone which is like 4 years old.

  • brbposting
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    10 months ago

    Don’t miss this article (Lemmy discussion) from an air purifier review site for an in-depth look at how trusted publishers have been downsizing, then outsourcing generation of affiliate listicles. Drowns out sites who actually buy & test products.

    alt-text: Google results for “best air purifiers “dotdash meredith”” showing People, Better Homes & Gardens, and a dozen other brands showing up, all reusing the same low-quality content

    • PrincessLeiasCat
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I only really use NYT Wirecutter for any kind of site that tests and reviews products.

      They list their methodology regarding how they choose which ones to test, who is testing, how the test is being conducted, what the results are based on, etc etc

      Is it the best one? No idea, give me your recs because I’d love to have multiple sites to go to. If I can’t find anything on Wirecutter, I’ll break down and see if Reddit has anything good.

      Truly shameful how useless so many once great tools now are, and it’s all in the name of greed.

      Edit: Just finished the article you linked - great read, thanks. Looks like Wirecutter is still good along with Tech Gear Lab and of course the site that wrote the article, HouseFresh.

      I have 3 sites to try now! :)

      • brbposting
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        10 months ago

        General - Wirecutter

        Tech - rtings

        General incl. cars - Consumer Reports

        Air purifiers apparently - House Fresh

        Elsewhere there’s so much fraud I’ve been tempted towards crazy. Like, start a company where I personally meet people who want to review stuff and scan their IDs and take their SSNs before publishing any of their experiences/recommendations. Try to suss out if they have family connections to any products, any possible financial compensation…

        For restaurants I’ve wanted to sit outside locations and ask diners who are leaving “ay this any good btw?”, given that’s hard to fake.

        It blows my mind we haven’t solved review fraud!

        alt-text: shoutout the local library for free Consumer Reports access; screenshot of their laptop comparison table with no ads, no SEO spam, no BS

        • GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          For the UK, Which does similar things to ConsumerReports.
          They’re not always experts, but they’re generally good reviews, and I honestly don’t have enough life to investigate every tumble drier myself. So having a summary of “in this price range, get this one” is very useful.

  • ozoned@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    10 months ago

    I stopped using it years ago because they were going downhill and still collecting your private information. I run my own SearXNG now. It proxies from multiple sources, no ads, no tracking. I really enjoy SearXNG as it’s mine.