deleted by creator

Yep, better disclaimers are inevitable. When they call it a ‘feature’ it isn’t getting fixed

Was is ever not completely under capitalism? As far as I’ve seen they were always fully going with hype over substance posturing

Pure enshittification, squeezing both sides. I had no idea on this part but that would explain a lot, fuckin wild

Here’s how that worked: when you ran a query like “children’s clothing,” Google secretly appended the brand name of a kids’ clothing manufacturer to the query. This, in turn, triggered a ton of ads – because rival brands will have bought ads against their competitors’ name (like Pepsi buying ads that are shown over queries for Coke).

Here we see surpluses being taken away from both end-users and business customers – that is, searchers and advertisers. For searchers, it doesn’t matter how much you refine your query, you’re still going to get crummy search results because there’s an unkillable, hidden search term stuck to your query, like a piece of shit that Google keeps sticking to the sole of your shoe.

But for advertisers, this is also a scam. They’re paying to be matched to users who search on a brand name, and you didn’t search on that brand name. It’s especially bad for the company whose name has been appended to your search, because Google has a protection racket where the company that matches your search has to pay extra in order to show up overtop of rivals who are worse matches. Both the matching company and those rivals have given Google a credit-card that Google gets to bill every time a user searches on the company’s name, and Google is just running fraudulent charges through those cards.

“They trust me — dumb fucks,” says Zuckerberg

Always good to keep in mind

Wouldn’t the api hit the cloud, isn’t it just a different interface?