Remix.run Logo
littlecranky67 2 days ago

Here is the experience when clicking a link on mobile:

* Page loads, immediately when I start scrolling and reading a popup trying to get tracking consent

* If I am lucky, there is a "necessary only". When unlucky I need to click "manage options" and first see how to reject all tracking

* There is a sticky banner on top/bottom taking 20-30% of my screen upselling me a subscription or asking me to install their app. Upon pressing the tiny X in the corner it takes 1-2 seconds to close or multiple presses as I am either missing the x or because there is a network roundtrip

* I scroll down a screen and get a popup overlay asking me to signup for their service or newsleter, again messing with the x to close

* video or other flashy adds in the content keep bugging me

This is btw. usually all before I even established if the content is what I was looking for, or is at any way useful to me (often it is not).

If you use AI or Kagi summarizr, you get ad-free, well-formatted content without any annoyance.

pembrook 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, this is the experience on virtually every content website that used to be tolerable or even good.

But this is because there is no viable monetization model for non-editorial written word content anymore and hasn’t been for a decade. Google killed the ecosystem they helped create.

Google also killed the display ad market by monopolizing it with Adsense and then killed Adsense revenue sharing with creators to take all the money for themselves by turning their 10 blue links into 5 blue ads at the top of the search results. Search ads is now the most profitable monopoly business of all time.

YouTube is still young, but give it time. Google will eventually kill the golden goose there as well, by trying to harvest too many eggs for themselves.

The same will happen with AI results as well. Companies will be happy to lose money on it for a decade while they fight for dominance. But eventually the call for profits will come and the AI results will require scrolling through mountains of ads to see an answer.

This is the shape of this market. Search driven content in any form is and will always be a yellow pages business. Doesn’t matter if it’s on paper or some future AGI.

brokencode 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

YouTube is 20 years old now. Either the encrapification is very slow or they landed on a decent ad model.

Plus there is a subscription that eliminates ads. I think it’s a great experience for users. Many creators also seem to do well too.

I think this should be the model for a new generation of search. Obviously there will be ads/sponsored results. But there should be a subscription option to eliminate the ads.

The key part here will be monetization for content creators. People are no longer clicking links, so how do they get revenue?

I think direct payments from AI companies to content creators will be necessary or the whole internet will implode.

WaxProlix 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's funny, I had YouTube's paid offering for a few years (I used the service a lot and want to support non ad-based revenue streams). But they changed something a while back that started giving me a degraded experience, and eventually made the site unusable. Did some digging and it turns out they were detecting my adblock and intentionally making my experience bad despite being a paid customer. I submitted a ticket or whatever but of course nobody gave a shit. I ended up upgrading my adblocker to something that worked on the new YouTube but of course at that point why keep the subscription if I have to fight some ads arms race anyway?

Ads are useful and have their place in keeping the web accessible to everyone, but Google's anti user policies really stretch that relationship.

snickerdoodle12 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Bullying their paying customers is such an insane choice

browningstreet 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've paid for Youtube Premium for a decade, use adblock in my browser, have no issues with performance on Youtube.

LocalH 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's funny how experiences can be so different (likely by Google's design, of course). I've been having degraded experience with YouTube using uBlock Origin on Vivaldi. I elected to make use of a one-month trial for Premium. Suddenly these problems went away. Interestingly, after canceling the trial, the problems still haven't come back (yet). Things like, I would load a video, it'd start playing, but the browser tab itself would just block for a good 20-30 seconds. The entire time, the video is playing (well, I could hear the audio but the visuals were frozen). Then things would unblock and comments would appear, etc.

The difference between my YouTube interface with and without premium is stark. Aside from the ads, it seemed like the algorithm pushed less slop in front of me to avoid. Purely anecdotal, and likely affected by A/B bullshit (or nowadays would it be more like A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I/J/K/L/M/N/O/P/Q/R/S/T/U/V/W/X/Y/Z).

abustamam 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I only watch YouTube on my iPad or rarely my android TV, and there, the premium experience is worth it, since it's difficult to block ads on those platforms anyway.

If your experience with YouTube is primarily through browser then yeah I can see why that experience is shitty.

I'm fine with sites detecting adblock, in the sense that I will just not go to those sites. But if I already pay for an ad free experience then there's no reason for them to care about my adblock, unless they're just mad they can't track me, in which case, they can fuck all the way off.

And yes, I know that Google is in that camp, so they can indeed fuck all the way off.

worik 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I was in complete agreement until:

> Ads are useful and have their place in keeping the web accessible to everyone,

No. Advertising is a cancer on commerce.

golergka 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Why would you use Adblock if you pay for premium?

WaxProlix 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

There are other websites on the internet, and I don't want to/didn't consider toggling off ghostery, noscript, ublock origin, etc per domain that I choose to pay for.

2 days ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
ygjb 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Because Adblock doesn't just block ads, it also blocks invasive trackers that I consider malware.

Paying to remove Ads means I don't want ads, it doesn't mean I consent to all of the other invasive tracking they do.

SoftTalker 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I do subscribe so I don't see ads. My complaints with YouTube are: I don't want "Shorts" in my suggestions, and yes they recently added the option to remove them but it's only temporary. They always come back and I always say "don't show me this" and they say "got it, we won't show you Shorts anymore" but in a few weeks they always come back. Do they think I forgot?

And they have some kind of little games now, which I don't have any interest in, but they have no option to remove them from my suggestions.

ClimaxGravely 2 days ago | parent [-]

For me the text has changed from "don't show me this" to "show less of this" and they come back about once a week now. I also have no option to remove them from the subscriptions feed.

I think a similar thing is happening with their crappy games too. They keep coming back (the games still say "don't show me this" though).

Nicook 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Its encrapification is real. It has been slow though, mostly affecting niche interests and smaller creators. And the ad experience has definitely gotten worse, but adblockers help. Try using youtube without and adblocker.

brokencode 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I pay for the subscription and don’t see any ads. It comes with YouTube Music. It’s great.

ceejayoz 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

None of your videos have in-video ads? "This segment is sponsored by NordVPN!" style stuff?

darrylb42 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Content creators still have their embedded ads. You just avoid all the non-skippable you tube ads

radley 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's another plug-in called SponsorBlock that will skip over most of those.

leptons 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I use Youtube on a Chromecast with the SmartTube-beta app, which skips in-video ads, if they are demarcated by the creator - and most videos with in-video ads have that. The app just skips right by the in-video ad, as well as a bunch of other non-interesting video content if it is specified in the video timecodes by the creator.

Another great feature of SmartTube-beta - and it's the feature that brought me to that app - is the ability to completely remove all "shorts" from the entire app. No more shorts. I've configured the app to eliminate them completely like they never existed.

nativeit 20 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This sounds amazing. I personally resorted to FreshRSS and an extension that allows me to spoof feeds from YouTube and socials as if they were RSS. It’s not perfect, but it is a chronological plain-text (apart from hyperlinks) list of content that I feel materially healthier for having switched to. My past experiences with alternative frontend interfaces for YouTube is that they last a few months, then Google tweaks their API just enough to break them all for a few weeks.

I also pay for YT Premium, and I have maintained a family subscription since they initially offered one. I wish they would just provide Premium users with options for turning off shorts, comments (per-channel ideally, but across the board would be fine too), games, and everything else I don’t care to ever engage with.

I also run a self-hosted AdGuard service for DNS-level adblocking, but it sounds like Google’s getting around that as well. Next stop will be DNS with SSL and a proxy. I am a little concerned that I am having to establish what must appear from the outside to be a very sketchy anonymizing infrastructure, and it’s all just to use the web the way I always have, whilst avoiding the increasingly intrusive and anxiety-inducing tracking and advertising.

sokoloff 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> if they are demarcated by the creator - and most videos with in-video ads have that

I'm almost positive that SmartTube is using the SponsorBlock database, which does not depend on creator-submitted demarcation, but rather on user-generated/crowd-sourced segment tagging. https://sponsor.ajay.app/

kylebenzle 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

In the old days people would pay to host video content and now people pay Google to watch other people's hosted video content. It's funny how easily people can be brainwashed into giving companies money for nothing. I'm still waiting for the first company to start selling bottled air next!

afavour 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You're talking as if video content has no intrinsic value of its own. Of course it does.

"Now people pay cable companies to watch TV shows. It's funny how easily people can be brainwashed into giving companies money for nothing."

dingnuts 2 days ago | parent [-]

I mean, when it launched the point of paying for cable instead of getting TV for free via broadcast was no ads

Now cable has ads and costs a fortune; I didn't know anyone who has it. I do still watch a little broadcast though, the price is right even if the programming isn't great.

If there's nothing on I turn it off and look at my phone

afavour 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> point of paying for cable instead of getting TV for free via broadcast was no ads

No, the point of paying for cable was to get more TV. Most cable stations have always had ads. You're probably thinking of HBO, which is a tiny subset of overall cable output.

LocalH 2 days ago | parent [-]

The original point of cable was Community Antenna TV, where you'd get a much better quality signal (and often even additional out-of-market but nearby channels). Then broadcasters decided to go into specifically seeking nationwide coverage (Ted Turner was a pioneer in this area). They also decided, due to the sports leagues, that cable should only deliver local stations in the same market as your location through blackouts (through my childhood I went from getting three ABC affiliates and two CBS affiliates, to one of each). It became unprofitable to manage blacking out the out-of-market station any time they were both running network or sports programming, so the out-of-market stations were generally removed (I also wouldn't be surprised if negotiations for retransmission consent included terms preventing carriage of out-of-market stations).

neaden 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think there was a time Cable didn't have ads, certain channels like HBO yeah, but never cable as a whole. The attraction was just having way more content.

stonemetal12 2 days ago | parent [-]

In the 1950s when Cable started in the US, there were no Cable channels. Cable was literally renting a pipe to a big antenna instead of your own small antenna in your house, so you got broadcast with better signal strength.

The first Cable channel was HBO. The second was TBS, it had ads from the beginning.

mwigdahl 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There are tons of companies selling bottled air. Here's a story from 7 years ago. There are lots more now: https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/jan/21/fresh-air-for...

tim333 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I get a lot of value from youtube - hours of entertainment. Also I don't pay and use an ad blocker which is maybe a bit unfair but thanks to the people who do pay.

marcellus23 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Using an adblocker certainly won't help smaller creators and niche interests. If you don't want ads but want to support creators, pay for Premium.

graemep 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

A lot of them have sponsors which pay more than the ads, or are on Patreon, or are also on other platforms that pay them a higher proportion or allow videos that risk demonetisation on Youtube, or sell merch, or something else.

marcellus23 2 days ago | parent [-]

Sure, and if you're a patreon supporter, or support them on a non-YouTube platform, great. But if they're monetized and you're just watching them on YouTube, which probably 90% of people do, then running an adblocker is preventing them from earning money they would otherwise have earned. Whether or not they're _also_ earning money via other means is irrelevant.

guappa a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Lol, if you want to support them pay their patreon. The few cents they get from you paying premium won't support them.

marcellus23 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't understand what point you're attempting to make. Yes, of course if you pay someone $5 a month on Patreon, they'll be getting more money from you than if you just used Premium or disabled your adblocker. And if you paid them $100/month, that would be more than $5. So?

Why does that make it okay to use an adblocker?

Nicook 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I use patreon for ones I care about. And many of the niche interests I'm interested in are demonetized anyways which is the crux of the issue.

tartoran 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I have a question. How much do small creators get for views from Premium users? Say they get a few thousand views per video, would they get anything from Premium users?

delecti 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I've seen some breakdowns, and (depending on the content, because different ad segments can be more or less lucrative) view time from Premium users tends to be worth more, and often way more.

As I understand it, a chunk of your membership fee is divided amongst all monetized creators you watch on a monthly basis, proportional to your watch time. A different chunk of your membership fee is divided between the creators and record labels, for your watch/listen time of Shorts and Youtube Music.

So the size of the creator is only relevant insofar as it can determine whether the channel is eligible for monetization. View time is not worth a different amount depending on the size of the creator.

radley 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Probably not much for a few thousand. My understanding is that it requires continually producing videos that attract 100k+ viewers. It doesn't pay a lot, but it attracts direct sponsors who pay better. The biggest money comes from selling your own products and services, like "How to make millions on YouTube" seminars.

sathackr 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

My YT premium recently expired for a payment issue and ffs the ads are absolutely insane.

BalinKing 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The YouTube search has been unusable for me for about the last year or so (maybe longer?), since every ~5 results are interrupted with clickbait only barely related to my query (and then, past a certain point, they all become unrelated).

no_wizard 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>YouTube is 20 years old now. Either the encrapification is very slow or they landed on a decent ad model.

Have you seen how many ads are in a video on YouTube? On desktop its no issue, but I use the YouTube app on my Apple TV now and then, and I tried to watch a few relatively short video, and I saw easily 4-6 ads per video, some of which were 90+ seconds long. Its awful

pxc 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I feel like YouTube's enshittification is already here. The algorithm has long been terrible, they now punish users for disabling watch history, and the ads are more frequent, longer, and more annoying. If not for inertia (lots of video creators still uploading primarily or solely there), I'd have abandoned YouTube entirely a long time ago.

littlecranky67 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

YouTubes content moderation guidelines / removal of videos that have any content just the slightest topic they don't want to see discussed is kind of a no-go why they don't get my money.

briangriffinfan a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So websites move to the Spotify model of getting paid... that's gonna suck.

philipwhiuk 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The advertising tier has gradually gotten worse on YouTube.

tempodox 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> …they landed on a decent ad model.

You must be joking. YT is so insufferable, I can only watch it via Firefox with uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger active. And even then only if and as long as I absolutely have to.

kylebenzle 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

YouTube only still "works" because of the cat and mouse ad blocker game. I don't know how but my new ad blocker seems to fast forward through all the ads. For a little while YouTube had them licked and I was watching 10 to 20 second ads all the time so temporarily gave up on YouTube until the ad blockers caught up again. Now YouTube is still functionally broken on TVs and mobile phones but works fine on a desktop computer still.

tempestn 2 days ago | parent [-]

Why not just pay for premium?

bombela 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Not OP. I did pay, for 10y. But the video quality kept slowly degrading (lower bitrate). And ads in the video content kept increasing.

YouTube also increased advertising some paying shows, YouTube shorts, and more. No way to say no, only "yes forever" or "no thanks not right now". And it comes back in a few weeks.

It also constantly sneakily lowers the video quality.

So I stopped paying. I combine ad block and sponsor block and I forget another one to cleanup the UI.

Often I download the video so that I can actually seek around without buffering (because YouTube buffers as little as possible to save cost, which I can understand).

Content nowadays is 30min instead of 5min. So you better be ready to skip and seek.

com2kid 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

YT premium has higher bit rates and sponsor block built in, but they don't call it that or advertise that it even exists. Instead they say it allows you to "skip commonly skipped segments of video" but basically it is sponsor block.

bombela 2 days ago | parent [-]

It's the bitrate we used to have before they made it a premium plus all star plus+ feature and downgraded the rest.

Netflix did the same. In fact they even silently downgraded us from 4k HDR surround sound during a software update. And nothing can get us back the max quality anymore. I stopped paying all together.

So you know what doesn't buffer, has the absolute best quality (like 4x the bitrate etc), all the languages and what not? pirated content.

It's just stupid how much easier it is to obtain predictable quality without stutter by downloading rather than actually paying a streamer service.

Plus the ads and other UX dark patterns are through the roof.

nativeit 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I’m amazed people can get rid of shorts for a few weeks. For me, I tell it I don’t want to see them and it’s literally back as soon as I refresh the feed. It’s aggressively anti-UX.

amlib 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Pay for a global monopoly that has always subsided its operation with infinite money from a near ad and search monopoly and private equity? Yeah, I will keep my uBlock Origin active, no thanks.

3form 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Watching things without having to log in is my use case. Not something that Google would want to ever cater for, so ad blocking it is.

drewr 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I spend noticeably less time on youtube than I used to because they keep shoving shorts in my face. I'm a premium subscriber, I click "fewer shorts," nothing changes. Maybe I should be thankful?

JoshTriplett 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Turn off all the history options, and bookmark https://www.youtube.com/feed/subscriptions , which shows you only what you're subscribed to, in reverse-chronological order. (It'll still show you shorts, but only those for channels you're subscribed to.)

EchoReflection 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I recently quit YT premium after decades of having it, and now I actually (weirdly) feel good when I see ads bc it's a reminder that I'm not giving Googletube 20$/month

namblooc a day ago | parent [-]

I wouldn't use the word decades to describe a time span of less than 11 years at maximum, but you do you!

margalabargala 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AI models will continue to improve, but open source models are, right now, good enough for plenty of tasks.

If I'm searching "how to get an intuitive understanding of dot product and cross product", any open source model right now will do a perfectly fine job. By the time that the ad-pocalypse reaches AI answers, the models I mention will be at the point of being able to be run locally using consumer hardware. Probably every phone will run one.

I suspect in the next decade we will see the business model of "make money via advertising while trying/pretending to provide knowledge" become well and truly dead.

nativeit 19 hours ago | parent [-]

> AI models will continue to improve…

[citation needed]

My intuitive sense—informed by media coverage, behaviors exhibited by AI companies and their investors, and a very foundational understanding of how it all works—is that AI models have largely hit a wall and have struggled to improve at all, in some very public cases the newer versions perform worse than their predecessors. The fact that most of the benchmarks are hardly more than internal tests designed to highlight very narrow performance metrics has made getting any reliable sense of the state of the art rather difficult. They do indeed have some extremely useful purposes, but I have yet to see anything that broadly justifies the expense of it all (in plain economic terms, but also in sociopolitical and environmental terms) and a lot of indications that they have recently reached some very firm limits.

margalabargala 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I certainly agree that we're at diminishing returns but I suspect there are a lot of data sources left untapped; audio recordings, etc, that would improve the models. Or just some other math improvement.

But in a world where they do not improve, that actually just strengthens the point I made in the rest of my original comment :)

streptomycin 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Google also killed the display ad market by monopolizing it with Adsense and then killed Adsense revenue sharing with creators to take all the money for themselves by turning their 10 blue links into 5 blue ads at the top of the search results.

Adsense is just for little hobby websites, no actual businesses use it. They all use header bidding, which is (mostly) not controlled by Google.

claudiulodro 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Before header bidding, publishers sold ad space through a “waterfall” method, offering the space to one ad exchange at a time, typically prioritizing whichever had previously offered the highest prices. But Google made it so that its AdX got “first look” access through DFP by calling it to submit a real-time bid before other exchanges got the chance to take part in an auction. That meant AdX could buy up any inventory it wanted as long as it met the publisher’s floor price, then pass the less desirable space to other exchanges, according to the DOJ.

[...]

> But Google moved quickly to reestablish AdX’s power. It created a competitor to header bidding called “Open Bidding,” which let Google take an extra cut of revenue. And under the adoption of header bidding, Google’s AdX ultimately got a “last look” advantage when publishers chose to feed the winning header bid into their publisher ad server — which most often was Google’s DFP. That’s because AdX’s advertiser buyers would then have the option to bid as little as a penny more than the winning header bid to secure the most attractive ad space.[0]

Google's header bidding-related shenanigans were a big part of the antitrust case against them, and they were found to be "monopolizing open-web digital advertising markets"[1], so I wouldn't say that it is mostly not controlled by Google.

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/24/24253293/google-ad-tech-a... [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-prevails-l...

streptomycin 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm aware of that stuff. That's why I said "mostly". That stuff is bad, but only somewhat impedes the effectiveness of header bidding. There still is bidding going on, there still are many bids being won by companies besides Google, and there's only so much that Google can do about that even with these shenanigans. It's a far cry from all ads being sold directly through Google like on AdSense, where they can simply take a giant cut off the top and call it a day.

dbtc 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Has there ever been an option to pay google $20/month for a better / add-free search?

The current subscription situation for LLM stuff actually makes me hopeful.

natebc 2 days ago | parent [-]

my kagi subscription is as valuable to me as my youtube premium sub.

DudeOpotomus 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is no right to make money. Period.

If you did, that doesnt mean you should. If you can, that doesnt mean you should.

fortyseven 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> YouTube is still young

I almost spit out my drink.

pembrook 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The open web that Google killed is 20 years older than YouTube.

Give it time.

LocalH 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean, compared to the music, TV, and film industries? YouTube is very young. Even many of today's media conglomerates have some sort of root that goes back 100 years or more.

tempodox 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's the usual enshittification. First they screw the end luser, then they screw their actual customers. If you depend on one platform as a member of either of those groups, you're screwed.

kelvinjps10 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is filters links in unlock for these kind of things, they're called annoyances

cyanydeez a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Basically, if we are smart Software as Public Infrastructure will take root and basic search and publication will be seen as ordinary government operations, like public parks and national forests.

jakebennet89 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

quectophoton 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For those who want to experience it: https://how-i-experience-web-today.com/

The only inaccurate thing of that meme page is that you only need to uncheck 5 cookie "partners", when in reality there should be at least a few hundred.

zahlman 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The web page source seems full of Easter eggs and I'm not sure how intentional that is. The generic labels and descriptions of content as "useless" make sense, but then I noticed things like multiple redundant </ul> tags and this script comment:

  src: "https://js.monitor.azure.com/scripts/b/ai.2.min.js", // The SDK URL Source
  crossOrigin: "anonymous", // When supplied this will add the provided value as the cross origin attribute on the script tag
which is part of configuration for some minified/obfuscated driver....

Anyway, is it really not even possible to set up things like NoScript and uBlock Origin on mobile?

jdiff 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Firefox for Android can handle uBlock Origin, probably NoScript as well. It's the one thing keeping me on Android at this point.

happyraul 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Are you saying on iOS there is no way to browse the Internet without an ad blocker? Maybe I should get an iPhone to stop spending time on my phone...

fsflover a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I run desktop Firefox on my GNU/Linux phone, so I could leave Android behind.

cobbaut a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> The web page source seems full of Easter eggs

Indeed... click the video play button :)

Workaccount2 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unfortunately it only has ~3 domains running JS on it's example site.

I needs to have 15+ to really capture that modern web experience.

marcosdumay 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The site has a few other issues... The ads contrast with the content instead of blending in; there are only 2 ads inline with the content, and one is clearly an easy to ignore banner; all the cookie "partners" could be disabled, there should be 2 or 3 that you can't change.

Jenk 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

    document.querySelectorAll("[type='checkbox']").forEach(c => c.checked = undefined)
Adjust the selector as neccessary, sometimes I'll use `#id-of-cookie-banner [type='checkbox']`

Probably useless for mobile though, unless you can punch it in the omnibar with `javascript:` prefix

tempodox 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And you get a laundry list of several hundred switches that you have to manually switch off to deny their “legitimate interests”.

lightbulbish 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

that was great, thanks for the laugh.

showcaseearth 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

omg, this is a gem

hereonout2 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You forgot the part about when you actually get to the content, there's usually about 5 paragraphs of SEO filler text before it actually gets onto answering the topic of the post.

progbits 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You are lucky if they even answer.

Most of those are like:

    $movie release date
    
    <five paragraphs of garbage>
    
    While we don't know the actual $movie release date yet, ...
chromehearts 2 days ago | parent [-]

These are the worst things ever

Disposal8433 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have noticed that a lot. For example:

What is the price of the Switch 2?

The Switch 2 can be purchased with money. <Insert the Wikipedia article about currencies since the bronze age>

pflenker 2 days ago | parent [-]

Recipe for Foo. Foo has always been my favorite dish. I fondly remember all the times my grandma made this for me. My grandma, who was born on August 2, 1946, as the daughter of… (10 more pages of text) To cook Foo the way my grandma did, you first need some Bar. Bar is originally native to the reclusive country of… (20 more pages of text)

sidewndr46 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You forgot 4 paragraphs text about how they went on a journey of self discovery, that lead to them spending time in the remote village of Y, learning the traditional methods of cooking the dish.

The dish in question is a ham sandwich.

chasd00 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah recipes are the worst. I least the acknowledge themselves and give you a “jump to recipe” button most of the time. I sometimes hit the print button and just use the preview screen too.

manwe150 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I don’t think recipes are much at actual fault here. It seems the fault of search engines preferring returning recipes with longer stories over just-the-recipe blogs or sites like AllRecipes. We humans just have to suffer as a result of the artificial selection of what the search engines wants for us to experience.

danaris 2 days ago | parent [-]

It's not just that: recipes on their own are, AIUI, not copyrightable.

zahlman 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

https://cookingforengineers.com is giving 500s for me. Per the Wayback machine it was working as recently as last month. They do include background stories but they're much better about this sort of thing. (The old-school aspects of the page layout also help.)

83 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Paprika (an app for storing recipes) can parse out the ingredient list and directions from a webpage. It's surprisingly good at it.

chasd00 2 days ago | parent [-]

thank you for this! i'll check it out

crustaceansoup 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't even know if the recipes themselves are real and tested any more or just slop.

It seems like it's more often than not that I'm coming across dishes that just do not make sense, or are poorly plagiarized by someone who doesn't understand the cuisine they're trying to replicate with absolute nonsense steps or substitutions or quantities. I used to have a great success rate when googling for recipes but now it's almost all crap, not even a mixed bag.

const_cast 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Big Mama's Best Brownie Recipe.

Let's start at the beginning. I was born in 1956 in Chicago. My mother was a cruel drunk and the only thing my father hated more than his work was his family.

jerojero 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This might be a hot take but I'm usually fine with this... If its authentic which most of the time it isn't.

But I don't know, I feel like personal stories are what really makes a blog worth reading?

I don't like it when it's unnecessary "info dump" type. Like, "we all know the benefits of garlic (proceeds to list the well known benefits of garlic)". It's not personal or relevant.

I just want there to be a well formatted way of viewing the recipe at the bottom for quickly checking the recipe on a second or third visit.

xp84 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Sure, but there's a time and a place, and when I'm looking for a recipe, especially if I'm landing on a site for the first time and don't even know who the author is yet, it's the time and place to do the shopping or the cooking, not for reading even an interesting origin story.

duderific 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I discovered justtherecipe.com and never went back. So far it's free and ad-free, though I suspect that will end soon.

showcaseearth 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is usually okay... what's not okay is that usually this narrative is broken up by ads, a constantly changing layout as you scroll, and eventually jumping so many times you can't resume scrolling, then eventually crashing because too many trackers/ads/etc overwhelmed the browser (on mobile).

jabjq 2 days ago | parent [-]

No, it's not okay. I used google to look for a brownie recipe; I want a brownie recipe and nothing else.

jkestner 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Now that’s a recipe I would read. We can fold in the failing publishing industry and have authors presented by King Biscuit Flour.

fhd2 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And then the part where you have to create an account to read past the SEO filler :(

It's so sad, cause it drags down good pages. I recently did a lot of research for camping and outdoor gear, and of course I started the journey from Google. But a few sites kept popping up, I really liked their reviews and the quality of the items I got based on that, so I started just going directly to them for comparisons and reviews. This is how it's supposed to work, IMHO.

thoroughburro 2 days ago | parent [-]

Outdoor Gear Lab is great, it’s true.

fhd2 2 days ago | parent [-]

Nailed it :D

mmikeff 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And that when the adverts refresh all the content on the page shifts and you lose track of what you have read.

blendergeek 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

or even worse, the page itself is just an AI summary of the topic

jgord 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

not to mention the mandatory cloudflare "are you human" pre-vetting page Im seeing on 15% of sites.

jesus wept.

johnisgood 2 days ago | parent [-]

And that I often have to wait for it to automatically get through it, which it does not, requiring me to click to verify I am indeed a human. Even if I am not even using Tor or VPNs.

nathan_douglas 2 days ago | parent [-]

Assuming that clicking to verify even works, which is shaky. On Safari, it seems to just loop me most of the time... which bums me out, since I generally don't have many issues with Safari.

fireflash38 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Good news! Now they are often AI drivel too. So you can get an AI summary of more AI crap.

the_real_cher 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is most of the results on the first page of Google search are AI slop.

thfuran 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Either that or fifty paragraphs of ai slop blathering in circles about the topic.

tmountain 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AI is following the drug dealer model. “The first dose is free!” Given the cost incurred, lots of dark patterns will be coming for sure.

nicbou 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

AI is built by the same companies that built the last generation of hostile technology, and they're currently offering it at a loss. Once they have encrusted themselves in our everyday lives and killed the independent web for good, you can bet they will recoup on their investment.

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

That indeed is likely to come, but having experienced user hostile technology, the appropriate response is to prepare. Some trends suggest this is already happening ( though that only appears to be a part HN crowd so far ): moving more and more behind a local network. I know I am personally exploring local llm integration for some workflows to avoid the obvious low hanging fruit most providers will likely go for. But yes, the web in its current form might perish.

_DeadFred_ 2 days ago | parent [-]

Would be cool if local libraries got together and figured out how to allow access to community LLMs. That fits more with my idea of the future and AIs than having the now dystopian tech companies running/defining it all.

pcdoodle 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Is there another edge to this sword? Can we fight back with LLMs that ignore sources with all the tracking / SEO and other garbage? I'd love to tell my local LLM that "I hate pintrest" for instance and it just goes "okay, pintrest shields are up".

troyvit 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Seconding the Kagi thing. You don't even need an LLM. If you search something like the term 'camping gear' search results pop up right away, no LLM response. However by each site's link is a little shield warning you about how many trackers and ads there will be on the page. Next to that is a lil kebob menu that lets you either boost the site or remove it from your search. That's also where their AI functionality is hidden. You can get a page summary or ask questions about that page.

If you'd rather the quick AI-summaries a la google you can put a question mark at the end of your search term. 'lawsuits regarding ferrets?'

And yeah as the sibling commenter pointed out, you can go into Kagi's preferences and explicitly rule out pinterest (or whatever site you want) from any of your searches for ever.

fxtentacle 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Kagi allows you to block Pinterest

a_vanderbilt 2 days ago | parent [-]

Kagi got me to sign up as an early adopter because it let me banish pinterest forever.

jdietrich 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's a market where nobody has a particularly deep moat and most players are charging money for a service. Open weight models aren't too far behind proprietary models, particularly for mundane queries. The cost of inference is plummeting and it's already possible to run very good models at pennies per megatoken. I think it's unreasonably pessimistic to assume that dark patterns are an inevitability.

simgt 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

For the sake of argument, none of the typical websites with the patterns described have a moat, and the cost of hosting them has plummeted a while ago. It's not inevitable but it's likely, and they will be darker if they are embedded in the models' output...

azangru 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> and most players are charging money for a service

The aricle talks about AI overviews. As exemplified by the AI summary at the top of Google search results page. That thing is free.

svachalek 2 days ago | parent [-]

1. Create free and good product

2. Attract large user base

3. Sell user data and attention to advertisers

4. Extract maximal profit from sponsors

5. Earn billions from shit product

geerlingguy 2 days ago | parent [-]

Hey that's like a popular Search engine's search results page!

ToucanLoucan 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You do realize of course that every service that now employs all these dark patterns we're complaining about was already profitable and making good money, and that simply isn't good enough? Revenue has to increase quarter-to-quarter otherwise your stock will tank.

It's not simply enough that a product "makes money" it must "make more money, every quarter, forever" which is why everything, not even limited to tech, but every product absolutely BLOWS. It's why every goddamn thing is a subscription now. It's why every fucking website on the internet wants an email and a password so they can have you activate an account, and sell a known active email to their ad partners.

xp84 2 days ago | parent [-]

I wish I could put 10 votes on this instead of just one. It just bothers me how success can be defined as something absurdly impossible like that.

We're already at a wild stage of the rot caused by the growth-forever disease: the most successful companies are so enormous that further profit increases would require either absurd monopoly status (Chase, Wells Fargo, B of A all merge!) or to find increasingly insane ways of extracting money (witness network TV: First they only got money from ads, then they started leeching additional money streams from cable providers, now most have added their own subscription service that they also want you to pay for, on top of watching ads.)

ISPs used to just charge a fee, now they also sell personal information about your browsing behavior for extra revenue, cap your bandwidth usage and charge for more, and one of them (comcast) owns a media conglomerate.

throwaway290 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yep. Dark patterns you can see are not that dark by comparison, we will need another word for coming dark patterns disguised in llm responses

lelanthran 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Yep. Dark patterns you can see are not that dark by comparison, we will need another word for coming dark patterns disguised in llm responses

As someone else said, you can probably filter responses through a small purpose-built/trained LLM that strips away dark patterns.

If you start getting mostly empty responses as a result, then there was no value prior to the stripping anyway.

throwaway290 2 days ago | parent [-]

If you can't tell when a big expensive llm is subliminally grooming you to like/dislike something or is selective with information then another (probably small and cheaper) llm somehow can? Arms race?

chasd00 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> If you can't tell when a big expensive llm is subliminally grooming you to like/dislike something or is selective with information

this is already there and in prod but called AI "safety" (really corporate brand safety). The largest LLMs have already been shown to favor certain political parties based on the preferences of the group doing the training as well. Even technical people who should know better naively trust the response of an LLM well enough to allow to make API calls on their behalf. What would prevent an LLM provider to train their model to learn and manipulate an API to favor them or a "trusted partner" in some way? It's just like in the early days, "it's on the Internet, it has to be true".

lelanthran 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> If you can't tell when a big expensive llm is subliminally grooming you to like/dislike something or is selective with information

I mean, I can tell when a page contains advertisements, but I still use an ad-blocker.

The point was not to help me detect when a response is ad-heavy, but to stop me seeing those ads at all.

> Arms race?

Possibly. Like with ad-blockers, this race can't be won by the ad-pusher LLM if the user uses the ad-blocker LLM.

The only reason ad-pusher websites still work is because users generally don't care enough to install the ad-blocker.

In much the same way, the only reason LLM ad-pushers will work is if users don't bother with an LLM ad-blocker.

throwaway290 2 days ago | parent [-]

> I mean, I can tell when a page contains advertisements, but I still use an ad-blocker

Yep, because why let people make money from their work right? You should just get content for free!

> this race can't be won by the ad-pusher LLM if the user uses the ad-blocker LLM.

As per my comment it literally can.

_DeadFred_ 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We need to move LLMs into libraries. They are already our local repository of knowledge and make the most sense to be the hosts/arbiters of it. Not dystopian tech companies whose main profits come from dark patterns. I get AIs for companies being provided by businesses, but for the average person coming from libraries just make so much more sense and would be the natural continuation/extension if we had a healthy/sane society.

littlecranky67 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I fail to see how that will work out. Just I have an adblocker now, I could have a very simple local llm in my browser that modifies the search-AIs answer and strips obvious ads.

svachalek 2 days ago | parent [-]

They won't be obvious. They'll be highly customized brain worms influencing your votes and purchases to the highest bidder.

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Yep. Right now, even with cookies inferences about individual humans are minimal, but exposing your whole patterns in speech make you a ripe target for manipulation at a scale that some may not fully understand yet. 4o is very adept at cold reading and it is genuinely fascinating to read those from that perspective alone. Combine it with style evaluation and a form of rudimentary history analysis, and you end up with actual dossier on everyone using that service.

Right now, we are lucky, because it is the least altered version of it ( and we all know how many filters public models have to go through ).

lopis 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Which sounds very illegal in most places, as clearly identifying sponsored content is required. Let's see how that turns out.

floatrock 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> as clearly identifying sponsored content is required

Citation needed?

Once AI content becomes monetized with ads, it's not going to look like the ads/banners we're used to. If you're looking into the past, you don't understand the potential of AI. Noam Chomsky's manufactured consent is going to look quaint by comparison.

_DeadFred_ 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

For hire drivers/having employees had very specific legal requirements in most areas. Let's see how that turned out. Oh yeah, the dystopian tech companies won and we the people got the benefit job/job rules being thrown out for the beauty that is independent contractor 'gig work'.

bdelmas 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well maybe not. Thanks that we have Gemini now to compete with ChatGPT. Competition may avoid dark patterns. But without competition yes definitely

generic92034 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Competition or not, dark patterns or not - sooner or later LLMs will need to earn money for their corporations.

moontear 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

But they do? Paid subscriptions for Gemini, ChatGPT and Copilot are a thing.

If Google throws in a free AI summary in their search it only helps promoting Gemini in the long run.

ileonichwiesz 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Look up the numbers. OpenAI actually loses money on every paid subscription, and they’re burning through billions of dollars every year. Even if you convince a fraction of the users to pay for it, it’s still not a sustainable model.

nicbou 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Even if they were profitable, the investors would feel that it's not profitable enough. They won't stop at breaking even.

generic92034 2 days ago | parent [-]

And even if it was the highest profit branch of the company, they still would see a need to do anything possible to further increase profits. That is often where enshittification sets in.

This currently is the sweet phase where growing and thus gaining attention and customers as well as locking in new established processes is dominant. Unless the technical AI development stays as fast as in the beginning, this is bound to change.

lelanthran 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I actually wondered about this myself, so I asked Gemini with a long back and forth conversation.

The takeaway from Gemini is that subscriptions do lose money on some subscribers, but it is expected that not all subscribers use up their full quota each month. This is true even for non-AI subscriptions since the beginning of the subscription model (i.e. magazines, gamepass, etc).

The other surprising (to me, anyway) takeaway is that the AI providers have some margin on each token for PAYG users, and that VC money is not necessary for them to continue providing the service. The VC money is capital expenditure into infrastructure for training.

Make of it what you will, but it seems to me that if they stop training they don't need the investments anymore. Of course, that sacrifices future potential for profitability today, so who knows?

fl0id 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

That’s just a general explainer of subscription models. As of right now VC money is necessary for just existing. And they can never stop training or researching. They also constantly have to buy new gpus unless there’s at some point a plateau of ‘good enough’

vidarh 2 days ago | parent [-]

The race to continue training and researching, however, is drive by competition that will fall away if competitors also can't raise more money to subsidise it.

At that point the market may consolidate and progress slow, but not all providers will disappear - there are enough good models that can be hosted and served profitably indefinitely.

sfmz 2 days ago | parent [-]

Seems like there can never be good enough models; the user will want it up-to-date models with respect to news and culture.

vidarh 2 days ago | parent [-]

For some uses, sure. But for plenty of uses that can be provided in context, RAG, or via tool use, or doesn't matter.

Even for the uses where it does matter, unless providers get squeezed down to zero margin, it's not that new models will never happen, but that the speed at which they can afford to produce large new models will slow.

malfist 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Why do you think Gemini is the authority on the internal costs of AI providers and their profit margins?

lelanthran 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Why do you think Gemini is the authority on the internal costs of AI providers and their profit margins?

Where did I say I think that?

sjsdaiuasgdia 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's the source you chose to use, according to you.

You don't mention cross-checking the info against other sources.

You have the "make of it what you will" at the end, in what appears to be an attempt to discard any responsibility you might have for the information. But you still chose to bring that information into the conversation. As if it had meaning. Or 'authority'.

If you weren't treating it as at least somewhat authoritative, what was the point of asking Gemini and posting the result?

Gemini's output plus some other data sources could be an interesting post. "Gemini said this but who knows?" is useless filler.

seunosewa 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The mediocre AI summaries aren't promoting Gemini when you can't use them to start a chat on Gemini. They effectively ads and search results for no benefit.

sumtechguy 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The electric bill does not pay for itself.

What is also interesting is one of the biggest search companies is using it to steer traffic away from its former 'clients'. The very websites google talked into slathering their advertisements all over themselves. By giving them money and traffic. But that worked because google got a pretty good cut of that. But now only google gets the 'above the fold' cut.

That has two long term effects. One the place they harvest the data will go away. The second is their long term money will decrease. As traffic is lowered and less ads shown (unless google goes full plaster it everywhere like some sites).

AI is going to eat the very companies making it. Even if the answers are kind of 'meh'. People will be fine with 'close enough' for the majority of things.

Short term they will see their metric of 'main site retention' going up. It will however be at the cost of the websites that fed the machine.

diogolsq 2 days ago | parent [-]

Good point.

Looking ahead, Search will become a de facto LLM chatbot, if it isn't already.

floatrock 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Competition may avoid dark patterns.

Oh bless your heart.

You don't even need to bring up corporate collusion, countless price gouging schemes, or the entire enshittification movement to understand that competition discovers the dark patterns. Dark patterns aren't something to be avoided, they're the natural evolution of ever-tighter competition.

When the eyeball is the product, you get more checks if you get more eyeballs. Dark patterns are how you chum the water to attract the most product.

deadbabe 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

To combat this, maybe we can cache AI responses for common prompts somehow and make some kind of website where people could search for keywords and find responses that might be related to what they want, so they don’t have to spend tokens on an AI. Could be free.

chasd00 2 days ago | parent [-]

I would be curious to see what would happen if you could write every query/response from an LLM to an HTML file and then serve that directory of files back to google with a simple webserver for indexing.

deadbabe 2 days ago | parent [-]

I think the future will be:

1. Someone prompts 2. Server searches for equivalent prompts, if something similar was asked before, return that response from cache. 3. If prompt is unique enough, return response from LLM and cache new response. 4. If user decides response isn’t specific enough, ask LLM and cache.

jonplackett 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I made this game inspired by all the dark patterns from darkpatterns.org - every pop up is based on a real dark pattern

https://www.termsandconditions.game/

bokkies 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Application error An error occurred in the application and your page could not be served. If you are the application owner, check your logs for details. You can do this from the Heroku CLI with the command heroku logs --tail

bryanrasmussen 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

the darkest pattern of all!

cudder 2 days ago | parent [-]

Funny because it's true. Nothing in the GP's list of dark patterns irritate me more than a site that initially loads and nicely displays the content but then takes it all away and switches to the generic next.js "Application error" when you move the mouse or try to scroll. FFS!

tim1994 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also get this. Firefox on Android in Germany.

timpera 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same for me! I'm also in the EU.

cylemons 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same, Western Asia

seszett 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I also get that.

jonplackett 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Weird only some people getting an error. Works ok for me.

It’s on a very old Heroku hosting plan. I should probably update that one day.

seszett 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Just for the record, I get the same result with Firefox or Chromium and with IPs in different EU countries.

Barbing 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

LMK, reporting in as well: broken when trying multiple ways on my end and wanna play! Great idea!

esskay 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Dead here in the UK too

andruby 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

me too. Are we all in the EU? (I am)

gorbypark 2 days ago | parent [-]

When you posted this, it would have been 1-3AM in North America (and probably large parts of South America), so yeah, probably mostly Europeans!

bokkies 8 hours ago | parent [-]

And the many keen HN readers down in South Africa! (also CET)

jama211 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Haha, this is great, nice work

DaanDL 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh this is good, I like it!

dspillett 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>* If I am lucky, there is a "necessary only".*

I never use those. I suspect that in many cases if there are "legitimate interest" options¹ those will remain opted-in.

----

[1] which I read as "we see your preference not to be stalked online, but fuck you and your silly little preferences we want to anyway"

vitro 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Recently, I've discovered Consent-O-Matic for Firefox [1], which rejects some cookie preferences. Not all of them, but it still helps here and there.

[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-mat...

viraptor 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They will because that's how things are supposed to work. For example your preference about tracking will get stored for that site. The same as login details. Those are legitimate interests and you never get an option for them.

csunbird 2 days ago | parent [-]

most of them try to argue serving ads and tracking is `legitimate interest`, which you have to disable manually

viraptor 2 days ago | parent [-]

> most of them

I'm also grumpy about lots of this, but most? Can you point at any data that support this?

m000 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"legitimate interest" is just weasel words. With some mental gymnastics, you can argue for anything to be legitimate. And you can continue to do so until someone steps up, challenges your claims in a court, and wins the case.

cudder 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That is such a silly stupid thing in the GDPR consent.

- "Please don't track me."

- "But what if we realllly want to?"

A normal response to that would be an even more resounding FCK NO, but somehow the EU came to the completely opposite conclusion.

indigo945 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Claiming tracking cookies as "necessary" is often illegal under the GDPR. This is an enforcement problem, not a problem with the law itself, or the EU.

"Necessary" means "necessary for fulfilment of the contract". Your name and address are necessary data when you order off Amazon, your clickstream is not.

lazide 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

If the content is free, monetizing you is clearly necessary (/s, kinda)

skinkestek 2 days ago | parent [-]

Monetizing is fine with me: There’s nothing stopping creators from showing relevant ads—ones they choose themselves. Sometimes I have even found myself wishing there had been an ad a few months ago for a software conference I just realized I missed.

If someone blogs about woodworking, show static ads for tools they actually use and love. If they're into programming, show JetBrains, cloud providers, or anything dev-adjacent. Totally fine by me.

The problem is that almost everyone defaults to Google Ads—which then serves me wildly irrelevant junk, think brain-melting pay-to-win mobile games or even scammy dating sites that have zero connection to the content I’m reading and zero relevance to my interests.

It’s not just noise, it’s actively degrading the experience.

spoiler 2 days ago | parent [-]

Ah I remember the good-old day when people were selling "ad spaces" on their sites that weren't obtrusive. And usually the ads were things the author approved of or even used

kedean 2 days ago | parent [-]

I miss the naive days of the million dollar homepage

mr_toad 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Necessary means necessary to add it to the page for the project manager to collect their annual bonus.

eitland 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Please show me where GDPR says this.

I think you'll find that GDPR says the opposite and the only reason this continues to happen is because authorities don't have enough resources to go after every at the same time and also because European authorities have a hard time against US companies.

cudder 2 days ago | parent [-]

Sure, here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

End of recital (47):

> The processing of personal data for direct marketing purposes may be regarded as carried out for a legitimate interest.

eitland 2 days ago | parent [-]

Have my upvote. I have just learned that targeted ads might be considered direct marketing. I always thought it was limited to things that had my name and address (physical, email or other) on it, excluding online ads unless they were part of a "logged in experience" like upsells inside the product I am currently using.

That said, I read the rest of the recital and I think it is rather clear to the degree that such things can be clear that if you didn't expect it, it isn't legal. Here are some quotes:

- "[...]provided that the interests or the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject are not overriding, taking into consideration the reasonable expectations of data subjects based on their relationship with the controller."

- "At any rate the existence of a legitimate interest would need careful assessment including whether a data subject can reasonably expect at the time and in the context of the collection of the personal data that processing for that purpose may take place."

I can assure you the even after reading this, if I have clicked "necessary only" (as this discussion started with) it is not my reasonable expectation that any data are stored except those that are strictly necessary for the navigation and the user visible features[1] of the site works.

I'll admit that it seems some people think there is an argument that can me made that online ads can be direct marketing, but I would not risk any of my savings to defend that claim in court and I don't think Facebook or Google want to help you either as they seem to trying their best to prevent people from targeting individuals or at least pretending they do. And if it does, it is still covered by the conditions above.

[1]: and yes, that means user features, so unless you are creating an online ad-collection of some kind, that probably does not mean ads

msgodel 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The only necessary cookies would be a session cookie for that domain which doesn't need a popup under the GDPR.

I always use the inspect tool to just remove the popup. Interacting with it could be considered consent.

Geezus_42 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Same as "Do Not Track'...

inopinatus 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Your AI chat bot is ad free for now. This comment brought to you by PlavaLaguna Ultrasonic Water. Make your next VC pitch higher than you ever thought possible! Consume responsibly

aerhardt 2 days ago | parent [-]

At least there is more credible competition, so there could be a variety of business models to pick - ad-backed or paid. The search engine wars truly ended up being winner-take-all.

nicbou 2 days ago | parent [-]

There was virtually unlimited competition on the web

ChocolateGod 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You forgot the popup requesting access to send you background notifications.

AlecSchueler 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> This is btw. usually all before I even established if the content is what I was looking for, or is at any way useful to me

And to find that out you have to hit Page Down about twenty times, scanning as you, because the content is padded out to increase ad coverage.

garylkz 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's because AI is still in the honeymoon phase, unless it's a paying service, at some point the summary will start to have context relevant ads.

Also, I felt like in long term that's going to kill off the good faith of all those smaller sites that are actually good, while the bigger ones still produce subpar contents.

somenameforme 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> "This is btw. usually all before I even established if the content is what I was looking for, or is at any way useful to me (often it is not)."

This is the huge one for me. If you search for something in natural language, the results you get on any search engine completely suck - yet ironically the AI overview is generally spot on. Search engines have been stuck in ~2003 for decades. Now the next 'breakthrough' is to use their LLMs to actually link to relevant content instead of using pagerank+ or whatever dysfunctional SEO'd algorithm they're still using.

nightfly 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Page loads, immediately when I start scrolling and reading a popup trying to get tracking consent

It was with the best of intentions but cookie banners have done more to hurt web browsing than anything else in the last decade

tyfon 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The banner is not the problem, the predatory tracking by webpages are. You can make a webpage without it no problem, my home page does not have it.

Voultapher 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

To add onto it the do-not-track header can be used to signal an opt out. There needs to be a browser wide setting that is communicated to websites without user interaction. Some German court even ruled that Linkdin IIRC has to respect DNT for that.

nightfly 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The banners themselves are ugly and can fill almost half the screen

Even website makers who don't use predatory tracking end up including them as a CYA tactic

2 days ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
plemer 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, but is your webpage profitable?

nikanj 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The law is good, but websites implement it badly on purpose to inflict consumer ire towards the EU. There's good money to be made if they manage to make the voting public hate the cookie banners so much the anti-tracking legislation gets repelled

2 days ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
bgro 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

also gotta have every click on the page to highlight text navigate to a shopping cart subscription page and then break the back button.

Clicking on a video to mute it also needs to navigate to a sponsor’s page and break the back button. And then the page reloads which doubles the page view count. Genius web dev decision. I bet they said “there’s literally no downsides to doing this!”

Also, the ads need to autoplay on full volume, often bypassing my system volume somehow so they can play even though the rest of the audio is on mute and none of the mute functionality works. Surely the user simply forgot they had mute on so we should just go ahead and fix that.

They also need to play on 4K ultra HD to use my entire monthly cell plan if I don’t stop it in the first 3 seconds, which I can’t do because the video has to fully load before I’m able to interact with it to click stop. Or clicking stop pauses it and then automatically restarts playing the video.

These webdev chrome devs need to stop adding new random features and start fixing the basic functionality. I don’t want fading rotating banners that save 3 lines of CSS. I want the “DO NOT AUTOPLAY. EVER.” Button to actually work.

weinzierl 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What you describe is subtly different from what is in the article.

The article is about Google (and other traditional search engines) snatching away clicks from web site owners. What you describe is AI tools (for lack of a better word[1]) snatching away traffic from the ruling gatekeepers of the web.

I think the latter is a much bigger shift and might well be the end of Google.

By extension it will be the end of SEO as we know it. A lot of discussion currently (especially on HN) is about how to keep the bad crawlers out and in general hide from the oh so bad AI guys. That is not unlike the early days of search engines.

I predict we will soon see a phase where this switches by 180° and everyone will see a fight to be the first one to be accessed to get an opportunity to gaslight the agent into their view of the world. A new three letter acronym will be coined, like AIO or something and we will see a shift from textual content to assets the AI tools can only link to.

Maybe this has already happened to some degree.

[1] Where would I put the boundary? Is Kagi the former or the latter? I'd say if a tool does a non-predetermined number of independent activities (like searches) on its own and only stops if some criteria are fulfilled it is clearly in the latter category.

ethbr1 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> everyone will see a fight to be the first one to be accessed to get an opportunity to gaslight the agent into their view of the world

In this model, only monetizable content will be generated though.

As much as we abhor what advertising has done to the web, at least it’s independent of content: pair quality content with ads, make money.

In the brave new AI search world, only content which itself is directly monetizable will be created. E.g. astroturf ads

ricardobeat 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> pair quality content with ads, make money

Huh, the exact opposite happened. Create as much filler content as possible, optimized for SEO, generate thousands of variants to capture search traffic, cover as much of the screen as possible with ads, use tricks to increase page view count, and then make money.

Publishers of quality content have moved to subscriptions, which is a different kind of trouble.

> only content which itself is directly monetizable will be created

We have already been here for a while and it can hardly get any worse.

ethbr1 2 days ago | parent [-]

> it can hardly get any worse

I’ll take that bet.

graemep 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> In the brave new AI search world, only content which itself is directly monetizable will be created

Or content that is not meant to make money (e.g. opinion pieces arguing for a cause), or is very specific to products that make money (e.g. documentation, manuals), or is funded by governments or non-profits for the public good.

arizen 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You're spot on. That shift you're describing isn't a prediction anymore, it's already happening.

The term you're looking for is GEO (Generative Engine Optimization), though your "AIO" is also used. It's the new frontier.

And you've nailed the 180° turn: the game is no longer about blocking crawlers but about a race to become their primary source. The goal is to be the one to "gaslight the agent" into adopting your view of the world. This is achieved not through old SEO tricks, but by creating highly structured, authoritative content that is easy for an LLM to cite.

Your point about shifting to "assets the AI tools can only link to" is the other key piece. As AI summarization becomes the norm, the value is in creating things that can't be summarized away: proprietary data, interactive tools, and unique video content. The goal is to become the necessary destination that the AI must point to.

The end of SEO as we know it is here. The fight for visibility has just moved up a layer of abstraction.

chasd00 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> I predict we will soon see a phase where this switches by 180° and everyone will see a fight to be the first one to be accessed to get an opportunity to gaslight the agent into their view of the world. A new three letter acronym will be coined, like AIO or something and we will see a shift from textual content to assets the AI tools can only link to.

i can definitely see LLMs companies offering content creators a bump in training priority for a fee. It will be like ad-sales but you're paying for the LLM to consider your content at a higher priority than your competition.

Propelloni 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I use Firefox with standard security options and the uBlock Origin Add-On on my Android phone and I virtually never see what you describe, bar the tracking consent nag screen ofc. Maybe we visit vastly different web content?

I guess if my experience was as much degraded as yours I wouldn't bother with the web anymore, so yay for AI summarizers, at least for the time being. And don't get me wrong, a summarizer is a workaround, not a solution.

cudder 2 days ago | parent [-]

There is an extension called "I still don't care about cookies" that mostly solves the nag screens (There's also a similar one that doesn't have the "still" in its name but that one was bought by an ad company and enshittified.) AFAIU it usually accepts the cookies though, so you should combine it with something that clears your cookies periodically.

Sometimes it breaks the site so that you can't scroll or something, but that's quite rare. And most of the time it's solved by a refresh. Very infrequently you need to whitelist the site and then deal with the nag screen manually. A bit annoying, but way better than rawdogging it.

Works on desktop & mobile.

reddalo 2 days ago | parent [-]

No need to use a specific extension, uBlock Origin is all you need. Just enable the "Easy List/uBO - Cookie Notices" filter from the filters list (the default is off).

aembleton 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

You can also add this filter to uBO: https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/abp/

cudder 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sweet, didn't know that. I'm gonna try if it works with less breakage. Thanks!

Propelloni 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm going to try that, thank you!

federiconafria 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I make the point of leaving right away, I hope some metric somewhere is showing them or that it screws with their SEO...

I might come back later though.

Mars008 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's why I don't use mobile for browsing. Only Firefox with JS disabled unless it's needed and I need that page.

ianis-r 2 days ago | parent [-]

Firefox with ublock origin does wonder on mobile

grishka 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

On desktop I have one of those one-click JS toggle extensions, so the moment I see any attempts to interfere with me reading the goddamn article, that website gets its privilege of client-side interactivity revoked due to abuse.

Some annoyed me so much I even disabled JS for them on my phone. I do that more rarely because of how unnecessarily convoluted that setting is in Chromium browsers on Android. You have to navigate 4 levels deep in the settings and enter the domain you want to block into a text field!

For example, I have JS disabled on everything Substack (and it really annoys me when I end up on Substack hosted on a custom domain).

latortuga 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ugh this just makes me wonder how long it will be before we start seeing responses to AI chat like "please watch this 30s ad / drink a verification can to get your answer". I have to believe that ads are coming.

CafeRacer 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Literally this other link from a first page of HN: https://www.androidauthority.com/why-i-use-grapheneos-on-pix...

hualapais 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have been leaning more and more on Marginalia Search to avoid the type of webpages you are describing. The filters centered on page technologies seem to weed out much that is wrong with the modern style-over-substance web, IMHO.

marginalia_nu 2 days ago | parent [-]

I'm actually rolling out changes as we speak that should make nuisance identification even better, and will result in throwing out fewer babies with the bathwater.

https://marginalia-search.com/site/www.fontstruct.com?view=t...

https://marginalia-search.com/search?query=special%3Apopover...

otherayden 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’ve actually been working on a tool that uses jina.ai’s “reader” api to let you see a rendered markdown view of a pages contents. Check it out at https://leidnedya.github.io/markweb or try it out with https://leidnedya.github.io/markweb#example.com

netdevphoenix a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If you use AI or Kagi summarizr, you get ad-free, well-formatted content without any annoyance.

Now. Nothing stopping them from injecting ads in their summary. And chances are that they will eventually

ssernikk a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I know it won't fix the core issue, but you can try (at least on android) Firefox with uBlock Origin (with filter lists for cookies and annoyances enabled). It makes the web usable on mobile for me.

LearnYouALisp 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

On a smaller phone I often can't even see the button and it won't let me zoom out/scroll to get to it

cluckindan 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

On iOS Safari, ”Hide distracting items” allows you to bypass the consent dialogs about 95% of the time without consenting to anything.

wonderwonder 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Pretty accurate, the web is generally unpleasant at the moment especially using a search engine as your entry point. The first page of results are irrelevant paid ads.

My web experience has been reduced to a handful of bookmarks, X, and chatgpt or grok. Occasionally I’ll go looking for government sites to validate something I read on X. Everything else is noise

niutech 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There were solutions like Google Web Lite, AMP HTML or Facebook Instant Articles, but sadly they are mostly gone. There is still reader mode in some web browsers (e.g. Speedreader in Brave) which helps a lot. And of course uBlock Origin (Lite) is a must.

bgwalter 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If nobody writes "content" any more, there will be nothing to summarize. Google is stealing the clicks from real websites that try to make a living.

This is naturally not addressed in the US "AI" Action Plan, same as copyright theft.

alentred 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My big hope is that somehow magically we avoid bringing this experience back to AI summaries and chats. Realistically, though, I will be on the lookout for the next generation of uBlock, NextDNS and the like.

greymalik 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For now. Some LLM responses will contain advertising eventually too. Google’s search revenue is plummeting. They have to make it up somewhere.

libertine 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Also people are just lazy and will choose the path of least resistance. I'll bet that Wikipedia and other websites are affected and don't fit in that list of legitimate grievances.

3036e4 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

NoScript removes almost all of that, at the insignificant cost of sometimes having to add some (usually temporary) exceptions to run scripts from a few domains.

IgorPartola 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Clay tablets and library books have no ads either. NoScript is not the solution to the web being full of AI-generated SEO crap. It’s a bandaid over the real problem.

mschuster91 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You don't have NoScript or AdBlock on any default browser on any relevant mobile platform.

ports543u 2 days ago | parent [-]

You have adblock on firefox mobile or in browsers like Cromite (fork of Bromite, based on Chromium).

rco8786 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> you get ad-free, well-formatted content without any annoyance.

for now! and we should enjoy it while it lasts. Ad-driven AIs are coming, it is inevitable.

ekianjo 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If you use AI or Kagi summarizr, you get ad-free, well-formatted content without any annoyance.

ad-free? For now. That's just a matter of time.

ndr 2 days ago | parent [-]

I don't know which models they use but it's likely already happening.

Yesterday's SEO battles are today battles to convince LLMs to produce ad tokens. The corpus is already ridden of such content. And LLM make it even easier to produce more such spam.

msgodel 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Don't forget the drop in device performance/battery from the ridiculously spammy analytics scripts they force on you.

AlienRobot 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

All because "content" isn't free to produce.

AI stole all the content from those websites, starving them from ad revenue.

The Google overview is made by the same company that puts those ads in those websites in first place.

What is coming next is that there will be ads in the overview and you will have no choice but to read it because all its cited links will be rotten.

carlosjobim 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Set up your browser to open all websites in reader view and all these problems are solved.

agent327 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Oh, don't worry, they'll be monetizing this as soon as you're hooked. Google will show you the AI content... after you've seen this ad.

Those data centers don't pay for themselves, you know.

ssss11 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And don’t try to exit or you’ll get another pop up “why are you leaving? Please don’t go”

visarga 2 days ago | parent [-]

Sometimes they hack the back navigation function and present their own clone of Google Discover feed. If you are not careful you might end up in a different feed.

federiconafria 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Or sending you back to their home page...

Barbing 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Anyone know the largest site that does this reliably? I've seen e.g. Meta's FB mess with the back button but not the cloning grift.

kraig911 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I mean you're not wrong try searching for any recipe or just a search result where you want a simple answer. This problem you're outlining isn't just the search engines/ai/results fault. Simple questions should have answers in paragraphs of dialogue and anymore than 1 ad.

tgsovlerkhgsel 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You forgot that after you've run the gauntlet of popups, you have a 50% chance of getting a hard paywall.

create-username 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I send the link to another browser, one with JavaScript disabled

jorl17 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

My "favorite" Google dark-pattern, for which the dreamy kid in me hopes they get fucking sued to oblivion for how offensive it is[1]:

1. Open safari

2. Type something so that it goes search google

3. A web results page appears

4. Immediately a popup appears with two buttons:

- They have the same size

- One is highlighted in blue and it says CONTINUE

- The other is faint and reads "Stay in browser" (but in my native language the distinction is even less clear)

5. Clicking CONTINUE means "CONTINUE in the app", so it takes me to the Google App (or, actually, to the app store, because I don't have this app), but this does not end there!

6. If I go back to the browser to try to fucking use google on my fucking browser, as I fucking wanted to, I realize that doing "Back" now constantly moves me to the app (or app store). So, in effect, I can never get the search results once I have clicked continue. The back button has been highjacked (long pressing does not help). My only option is to NEVER click continue

7. Bonus: All of this happens regardless of my iPhone having the google app installed or not

So: Big button that says "CONTINUE" does not "CONTINUE" this action (it, of course, "CONTINUES" outside).

I just want to FUCKING BROWSE THE WEB. If I use the google app, then clicking a link presumably either keeps me in its specific view of the web (outside of my browser), or it takes me out of the app. This is not the experience I want. I have a BROWSER for a reason (e.g. shared groups/tabs...)

Oh! And since this happens even if I don't have the app, it takes me to the app store. If I install the app via the app store, it then DOES NOT have any mechanism to actually "Continue". It's a fresh install. And, of course, if I go back to the browser and hit "back", I can't.

So for users who DO NOT HAVE THE APP, this will NEVER LET THEM CONTINUE. It will PREVENT THEM FROM USING GOOGLE. And it will force them to do their query AGAIN.

Did the people who work on this feature simply give up? What. The. Fuck?

This behavior seems to happen on-and-off, as if google is gaslighting me. Sometimes it happens every time I open Safari. Some other times it goes for days without appearing. Sometimes in anonymous tabs, sometimes not. Logged in or not, I've seen both scenarios.

I can't be sure, but I genuinely believe that the order of the buttons has been swapped, messing with my muscle memory.

Basically it's this image: https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/1m76elp/how_do_i_st...

Except a still image cannot describe the excruciating process of dealing with it — especially realizing "oh, wait, I clicked the wrong button, oh wait, no no no, get out of the app store, oh oh oh what did I type again? Damn I lost it all!..."

[1]I would quit before implementing this feature. It disgusts me, and we're talking about google, not some run-of-the-mill company whom you have to work for to barely survive. This is absolutely shameful.