These types of moves really remind me of what caused Microsoft to get the ire of regulators in the 90s. Doesn't this seem pretty anti-competitive if it can be proved that the results from other companies are better, but youtube results are chosen instead. Of course the definition of "Better" is subjective, so there's a huge amount of wiggle room.
It's interesting that the "brand new" search engine seems like a dead industry. All of the newer competitors aren't starting from scratch and are just aggregating together results in new ways or focusing on privacy. Is it really that impossible to bring into existence a new search engine. For the vast majority of queries Google seems to only return major brands anyway.
The engine isn't the problem. The indices are. Google has massive amounts of data to index over, and they've been collecting it in useful form for longer than anyone else still in the game.
Good point, the data is the key. There's of course the common crawl data now, doing some sort of that plus deltas of "current" likely could be a starting point. But also turning that into usable indices that can be returned in milliseconds is an art I'm sure.
My main point still stands though. How is there not anyone willing to take another shot at competing here, the world's love affair with Google is no doubt over. DuckDuckGo is relatively popular even though it doesn't seem to offer anything truly original in the search space.
A truly new way to search that helps fight the monopolistic search behavior would be very useful. It feels like something Mozilla foundation would be into if they didn't receive so much funding from Google.
How relevant is the stale data however? Google started expiring old advertising data not because of any PR concerns but because it was useless to them even with cheap storage.
Search data isn't neccessarily user data but what good do the particulars of search data for long defunct domain names provide them? The only thing relevant now are any current archives to search.
I've found Facebook video tends to be the source more often for live videos or recently live videos. For instance, my state's coronavirus briefings are live on their website and Facebook. When there were protests/riots in my town, videos of it happening were coming from Facebook, not YouTube. I presume at some point it ends up on YouTube, but for "current events" I find myself often bounced over to Facebook.
Meanwhile, I never find like... quality channel content anywhere but YouTube. The sort of thing where a scripted, well-recorded and annotated video is produced regularly... YouTube leads there by far.
It's unfortunate that a major newspaper has a well-known bias (in this case, against Google). Makes it hard to trust anything they say on the subject; although a known bias is certainly better than a surreptitious one.
I am engaging with the comment, about how bias is bad, and surreptitious bias is worse... The fact that you're both working for the company in question is kinda relevant to that.
To be honest, when I do searches on google video, I always hope I get a youtube result. If it's not, it's often a webpage with an embedded youtube result, but the native non-youtube videos are even worse from a usability perspective. I sometimes use site:youtube.com to improve this. Youtube is just really good and the vast majority of competitors are bad.
Except for Vimeo. Vimeo is great. And I hope we get more youtube competitors.
EDIT: Also, I don't like the search system within Youtube itself. Googling for videos seems to work better.
Is Google ever going to do anything about the QAnon BS Youtube's algorithms are spreading like wildfire? I see more people being taken by this bullshit every day, turning into anti-mask/anti-vax/anti-fact "COVID IS A HOAX CREATED TO DETHRONE TRUMP" nutjobs seemingly overnight.
It seems every week more people on my social media feeds, who I previously thought of as stable and sane individuals, are suddenly going off on rants about how the "sheep" are trying to force "communism" on them with a "fake virus"... and sharing QAnon propaganda to "prove" it.
I've reported more misinformation-spreading videos than I can count at this point, and not a single one has been taken down. The people creating them just keep growing their follower bases, and keep increasing the level of insanity in their videos.
If you start watching videos debunking the insane misinformation these conspiracy theorists and cultists are spreading, the "watch next" list is pretty much always going to be filled with videos from conspiracy theorists. It doesn't matter if you're logged in, logged out, using a fresh browser, on a fresh IP, etc. The algorithm is actively feeding people dangerous misinformation.
If this doesn't stop, we're never getting out of our current situation.
Google will prioritize the video that gets more clicks from their results page. If I search for something and see both YT and FB links, I'm definitely going to YT, because I know it'll work (vs FB links which sometimes ask me to sign in, sometimes give me a vague permissions error, sometimes give me some other error).
19 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 51.2 ms ] threadIt's interesting that the "brand new" search engine seems like a dead industry. All of the newer competitors aren't starting from scratch and are just aggregating together results in new ways or focusing on privacy. Is it really that impossible to bring into existence a new search engine. For the vast majority of queries Google seems to only return major brands anyway.
My main point still stands though. How is there not anyone willing to take another shot at competing here, the world's love affair with Google is no doubt over. DuckDuckGo is relatively popular even though it doesn't seem to offer anything truly original in the search space.
A truly new way to search that helps fight the monopolistic search behavior would be very useful. It feels like something Mozilla foundation would be into if they didn't receive so much funding from Google.
Cliqz did and they lost.
Google still reigns supreme in the text search department though.
Search data isn't neccessarily user data but what good do the particulars of search data for long defunct domain names provide them? The only thing relevant now are any current archives to search.
It's so obvious as well, the quality of the video is far worse and sometimes zoomed in to hide watermarks.
I'll never directly visit a video on FB again.
Meanwhile, I never find like... quality channel content anywhere but YouTube. The sort of thing where a scripted, well-recorded and annotated video is produced regularly... YouTube leads there by far.
https://www.google.com/search?q=rupert+murdoch+google&rlz=1C...
Except for Vimeo. Vimeo is great. And I hope we get more youtube competitors.
EDIT: Also, I don't like the search system within Youtube itself. Googling for videos seems to work better.
It seems every week more people on my social media feeds, who I previously thought of as stable and sane individuals, are suddenly going off on rants about how the "sheep" are trying to force "communism" on them with a "fake virus"... and sharing QAnon propaganda to "prove" it.
I've reported more misinformation-spreading videos than I can count at this point, and not a single one has been taken down. The people creating them just keep growing their follower bases, and keep increasing the level of insanity in their videos.
If you start watching videos debunking the insane misinformation these conspiracy theorists and cultists are spreading, the "watch next" list is pretty much always going to be filled with videos from conspiracy theorists. It doesn't matter if you're logged in, logged out, using a fresh browser, on a fresh IP, etc. The algorithm is actively feeding people dangerous misinformation.
If this doesn't stop, we're never getting out of our current situation.