| ▲ | Legend2440 4 hours ago |
| According to Google, users are adopting it. They say AI mode is the most popular feature they've ever introduced, and is driving an increase in total search queries. >Just one year after its debut, AI Mode has surpassed one billion monthly users, with queries more than doubling every quarter since launch. As people have realized just how much more Search can do for them, they’re searching more than ever before — so much so that last quarter, we saw queries reach an all-time high. >Another place where we’ve been rapidly innovating is in the Gemini app. Last year at I/O, the Gemini app had 400 million monthly active users. Today, we’ve surpassed 900 million, more than doubling in a year. In that same time, daily requests have grown over seven times. |
|
| ▲ | Sleaker 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Isnt this essentially just slight of hand? Google basically defaults to AI search now doesn't it? So of course it will be 'fastest adopted' it's what is shoved in peoples faces. If the results are garbage, or people have difficulty with it... Of course number of searches goes up. That doesn't mean the product is better or its not resulting in brand damage. |
| |
|
| ▲ | dpkirchner 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| These are the same folks that removed the very useful Google cache feature because people weren't using it any more. What they forgot to say is they hid the feature beforehand. Of course they have more AI queries every day. They have full control over what goes to LLMs and what doesn't. |
| |
| ▲ | xp84 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Really smells like some high-ups' bonus was tied to these KPIs and they're guaranteeing that they can't lose. |
|
|
| ▲ | mrweasel 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| While I'm not opposed to the idea that Google AI mode is so good that people use it more, I also feel like the average person only have so many queries per day. Google statement would indicate that people had a number of queries that they just opted to ignore, because find the answers was to cumbersome. I'm not entirely sure I'm buying that, unless users keep prompting the AI to reduce the amount of reading they need to do. Sort of interrogating the AI, rather than reading a Wikipedia page. |
| |
| ▲ | Legend2440 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | AI mode isn't for queries, it's for questions. You ask it direct, specific things like 'how do I do <x> in <y>' and it provides a fast answer. People have many more questions in their life than they do queries. | | |
| ▲ | gbalduzzi 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | In programming forums like Hacker News people are incredibly detached from the average experience with technology, sometimes it is buffling. Most non technical people I know asked questions to Google even before the AI overview. Instead of looking for the answer in seo-bloated articles, they find it in the overview. I think google should improve in detecting the kind of query when I need a link that I don't remember, and deactivate the overview on those. If I search for "ryanair booking" I clearly need the url for booking a Ryanair flight, AI overview is useless | | |
| |
| ▲ | dandanua 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The fact that users are using more search queries means they can't find what they want with a lesser number of queries. It seems that Google's PR team doesn't have an incentive to understand that, or thinks that everyone else is stupid. | | |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | My guess is that they are spinning it as "users enjoy talking to the AI instead of searching, so they do it more" Rather than "users don't find what they want with the AI as easily so they have to spend longer with it" |
|
|
|
| ▲ | gazebo2 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I mean, "AI Mode" is the default result when you Google something, so of course they're seeing high usage. Driving an increase in total queries is probably because instead of just Googling something and getting the right results like it was 10~ years ago, now you have to interrogate a chatbot or try multiple queries. I would think higher total queries is more an indicator that your search function isn't effective. |
| |
| ▲ | SirFatty 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "I mean, "AI Mode" is the default result when you Google something" No, it's not. AI mode is something you have to select (in the search window). There is an AI overview provided with your basic search results. | | |
| ▲ | pbhjpbhj 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I agree with their assessment that '"AI mode" is the default' - https://ibb.co/Pz9LqKRb. That's what I get, in the UK, logged out of Google, from a search in Firefox omnibar using "Google" as provider. I'm aware that they have other things that can be described as AI modes. | | |
| ▲ | blueg3 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's AI Overview, just like it says at the top of the box. AI Mode in that screenshot is the tab to the left of All. |
|
| |
| ▲ | khimaros 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | this has not been my experience on desktop or Android. did you opt into something? are you accessing via browser search or Google.com? | |
| ▲ | esseph 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Driving an increase in total queries is probably because instead of just Googling something and getting the right results like it was 10~ years ago, now you have to interrogate a chatbot or try multiple queries. I would think higher total queries is more an indicator that your search function isn't effective. I wonder how much the search results thing is related to language and locality. I have a hunch but I haven't really dug into it. I live in the US, I speak English, and my browser is normally chrome. The number of times I've gone to the 2nd page in Google search results you can probably count on one hand in the last 15yr or so. I use the standard Google search things when I want specifics... Using quotes, site:news.ycombinator.com to search a site, or add a "-" to remove results from that site. I use a "+" when needed. Nothing fancy. When people say they can't find things in Google search, I'm genuinely baffled. I have a strong suspicion that it has something to do with the combination of browser, locality, and language. Why? Could be tons of reasons for that, some probably anti-competitive on the browser side. I have tried to use ecosia, start page, duckduckgo, etc. Was never happy with those results and always ended up back at Google search. I just want to know what's different, you know? I look up some pretty obscure stuff sometimes. Note: I do normally have my Google account logged in in the browser when doing search, however I have search personalization and history turned off, so that should not be influencing the quality of my search results compared to whatever "baseline" is. | | |
| ▲ | WarmWash 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It started when Google made a hard push to improve search for everyday people. They essentially nerfed "expert google skills" to bolster "noob google skills". Regular people are/were really bad at using google, so google moved towards showing what it thinks you want rather than what you want. They paved over the skill gap between people who understood keywords and word order, and people who just typed in a quasi legible sentence to find something. In doing so though, they killed a lot of skill that people had developed with google for years. Basically they made the game worse for pros so it could be better for amateurs. I have never heard a non-tech person complain about google getting worse over the years, and they seem to overwhelmingly use AI overviews now too. | | |
| ▲ | xp84 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > they seem to overwhelmingly use AI overviews now too. Hard agree. The only thing I've ever witnessed another person do on Google (this is only an incredibly slight exaggeration) is: 1. Type a 'query' - either a brand/website name or some kind of stream of thought like "dishwasher error 03F" (without quotes) 2. Click or look at the very top thing in the results. This used to mean 80% of the time they'd click the top ad, 20% the top organic result. Then they started putting non-clickable "answers" in that top spot, which would always be accepted as 'the right answer'. When those appeared, approximately no one would ever click any 'blue links.' These started out pretty reliable because they were just direct extracts from sites like IMDB: "Brad Pitt is 44 years old" etc. Now it's like 60% of the time an ad, 40% of the time their bargain-basement-model "AI Overview" slop. Either way, approximately all users always just use whatever is on top and ignore everything else. | | |
| ▲ | esseph an hour ago | parent [-] | | > Either way, approximately all users always just use whatever is on top and ignore everything else. Wtf |
| |
| ▲ | pbhjpbhj 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >"a hard push to improve search for everyday people" Citation needed. A hard push to change their search offering, sure. To improve it? Well, if by improve you mean 'require more interaction and viewing of more adverts on average before leaving' ... | | |
| ▲ | WarmWash 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Again, if you have been on HN since 2009, you are likely on the far fringe of Google's user demographics, which at this point is pretty much "The average human being on Earth". I would bet all of my money that you never once did a Google search (pre-LLM mania, but maybe even after) that looked like "What kind of clothing is best for when you are going hiking around the lake, so my feet don't get so cold?" Sadly, this is how most humans have used a search engine for decades now. | | |
| ▲ | watwut an hour ago | parent [-] | | I find that weird assumption. Why would you expect HN people not do such searches? They worked for years. And you frequently ended up finding a discussion forum with around that question and relevant discussion under it. |
|
| |
| ▲ | esseph 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I just don't know what I'm doing different, I'm just keyword searching and using a couple of inclusive/exclusive flags. Was I the frog in the pot and now I'm cooked? I don't feel like in search Google any different from maybe 2005 or so. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | rolph 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| how many of those queries contain keyword groups such as "how do i get rid of the AI search?" |
|
| ▲ | watwut an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > driving an increase in total search queries I search more when I cant find the thing I am looking for. I search less when I find the thing I am looking for. Second, it takes additional effort to not do AI search. |
|
| ▲ | autoexec 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > They say AI mode is the most popular feature they've ever introduced, and is driving an increase in total search queries. Technically, all the people who google "how do I disable this shitty AI mode in google" would count as "driving an increase in total search queries." An easy way to make a feature popular is to force it on everyone. Then you can pat yourself on the back when 100% of your users are using it! |
| |
| ▲ | baggachipz 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I remember when Internet Explorer was the most used browser. The fact that people were just using it to download Chrome doesn't matter to stats. |
|
