[HN Gopher] Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquit...
___________________________________________________________________
Google I/O: Big changes coming for SEOs with ubiquitous AI
Author : rgrieselhuber
Score : 52 points
Date : 2023-05-10 21:44 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.demandsphere.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.demandsphere.com)
| Smoosh wrote:
| I see mention in the article of content creation. But are search
| engines working on task-related personal assistants?
|
| For one example, If I want to take a holiday, could an assistant
| work out the best dates (based upon preferences of availability,
| cost etc), and research the best airfares (excluding that
| particular airline I hate) and find a hotel room with the
| features I want, and throw in a few sightseeing activities which
| appeal to my personal tastes, then summarise it up into a travel
| itinerary for me to approve. Then, upon approval it proceeds to
| book (and pay for?) all the things.
| ShamelessC wrote:
| GPT-4 with a calendar plugin can likely already do this.
| WirelessGigabit wrote:
| While it could automate it I don't think it would be better.
|
| In fact it would be worse. Websites would try and game the
| system to be the one that ChatGPT chooses for you. And now you
| are relying on a system that has no incentive of telling you
| the truth. At least if I check to go kayaking on day 2 of my
| vacation, I can compare the top 3 websites, cross reference
| with Yelp to see which one has the best value for the $.
|
| Plus there still is the part where the data being sourced isn't
| formatted the same, so mistakes will be made. It even happens
| with manual research. You miss the part where one offers a
| pickup and the other one doesn't. ChatGPT will suffer from that
| too.
| TheObviousOne wrote:
| I think we should call it GEO - GPT Engine Optimization. :)
|
| Furthermore, the article lack of how to tackle those shifts with
| depth analysis. For example: How can one put their info to be
| presented by a GPT/GPT-plugins.
| tr90814 wrote:
| I prefer LLMAO: Large Language Model Appearance Optimisation
| WirelessGigabit wrote:
| I don't know if I'm against this. If it means that websites will
| return to having less noise on their pages so that I get to the
| information I want faster, I don't care.
|
| The way Google shaped SEO meant that many websites have tons of
| text just to prove that they are the authority.
|
| Googling for like a Jerusalem Bug bite risk or Black Widow bite
| risk makes you end up some local pest control website telling you
| will get a fever (former) or die (latter) from the bite. Of
| course, they want to sell you services, so they build their SEO
| stating that they are the authority. They are not. And this is
| the problem with the web. There is no authority of information.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| Hot take: SEO is dead, content farms are done, almost no one will
| leave Google/Bing to read more than what it generates.
|
| Thank you content writers for your service training LLMs. Here's
| 10 amazing ways to find a new career in a LLM world.
| penjelly wrote:
| is this a hot take? it seems obvious that 95% of searches for
| answers will end at chatgpt/llm (even if no good answer
| returns) which yes will kill SEO and traffic to content
| websites to begin with.
| mstachowiak wrote:
| I tend to agree, because if Google doesn't, OpenAI et al
| will. The real question is how does Google balance this
| against the loss in advertising revenue?
| grrdotcloud wrote:
| Prompt trainers and tweakers and optimizers will probably
| replace the SEO types.
|
| I'm terrified of a world where I ask, what beverage will be
| served on Mars, and the answer will be engineered to be given
| as Coca-Cola is a popular drink possibly available on Mars, or
| right now. Would you like it delivered?
| hsbauauvhabzb wrote:
| I'm more worried about automated astroturfing and propaganda.
| arsome wrote:
| Well, it's a little late for that one.
|
| Fire one of the many offline LLMs up on a university
| network or somewhere else that a single IP connecting many
| times won't be too suspicious and let it go to town.
| arsome wrote:
| "Prompt trainers" and such will just be replaced by slightly
| better LLMs that can do that part already or inquire for
| further details from a user.
| esafak wrote:
| No, because Coca Cola doesn't have what plants crave.
| justinator wrote:
| Technically sodium is an electrolyte, so Coca Cola does
| have what plants crave.
| [deleted]
| Swizec wrote:
| Already today fewer than 50% off searches result in a click
|
| https://thenextweb.com/news/google-search-no-clicks
| jacooper wrote:
| The issue is getting people to click on your website, why would
| any one do that if the entire content is already extracted by the
| ai, which directly gave it to the user?
| pers0n wrote:
| Exactly, just like info gets ripped off websites onto
| Wikipedia, with very few references, it's hell getting them cuz
| they claim you want the link back, cahtgpt references hardly
| anything
| renewiltord wrote:
| Well, finally people will just make things for the pleasure of
| adding to the knowledge in the world rather than trying to
| "build an audience" or "monetize my content" or whatever. No
| one is going to click through to your blog, so you have no
| incentive to shittify it.
|
| We're going back to the original days of the Internet that HN
| users often beg for. Now only the true creators will create for
| the sake of creation: ars artia gratis.
| add-sub-mul-div wrote:
| Maybe we'll end up in a place where most people ask an LLM and
| take the first opaque answer they're given and be done with it.
| But others with more curiosity and skepticism will continue to
| go to real sources, evaluate their trustworthiness, weigh a few
| against each other, bypass intentional or unintentional
| bias/censorship in some tech giant's algorithm.
| brookst wrote:
| Are you saying that the motive for posting a bread recipe that
| starts with 5000 words about the history of bread will
| evaporate, so we'll be left with websites from enthusiasts who
| have something interesting to say?
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| maybe... but will an ai search even tell you those sites
| exist?
| fny wrote:
| Isn't this an issue as is? Theres a lot of content summarized
| at the top which answers the question I have more often than
| not.
| waboremo wrote:
| Somewhat, it's only not really an issue currently because
| most of the top answers aren't great and you want to look for
| a better overview. You can't currently get the overview from
| Bing or Google, only whatever sentence they've decided to
| highlight.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-05-10 23:00 UTC)