this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
669 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59020 readers
3008 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It used to be that you would do a search on a relevant subject and get blog posts, forums posts, and maybe a couple of relevant companies offering the product or service. (And if you wanted more information on said company you could give them a call and actually talk to a real person about said service) You could even trust amazon and yelp reviews. Now searches have been completely taken over by Forbes top 10 lists, random affiliate link click through aggregators that copy and paste each others work, review factories that will kill your competitors and boost your product stars, ect.... It seems like the internet has gotten soooo much harder to use, just because you have to wade through all the bullshit. It's no wonder people switch to reddit and lemmy style sites, in a way it mirrors a little what kind of information you used to be able to garner from the internet in it's early days. What do people do these days to find genuine information about products or services?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 157 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It is so ironic that SEO has become the very problem it was invented to fix: all these jokers gaming the system have all but plunged us all back into prehistoric internet times, before search engines appeared and people had to remember which specific sites to go to find information online.

[–] [email protected] 103 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

SEO solved the problem it was meant to fix, i.e. "users arent looking at our site enough." You're fooling yourself if you think it was ever about making searches more useful for the user.

The very conceit of SEO defeats the purpose of a search. The idea is the search combs through sites, finds what the user wants, and returns it to them based on what it believes is the closest match to what the user wanted. It's a process between two parties: the user and the search engine. The second the websites start trying to inject themselves into this process by adjusting their content to the search, it corrupts the process.

Picture yourself in a library looking through the card catalog. You're searching for something, using a system to locate it. Imagine if the books you're looking for spontaneously changed their titles or authorship just to "help you find them" while you're flipping through cards. Imagine if you're walking down the shelves and books are literally shifting around like fucking Hogwarts, trying to get in front of you.

That is the inherent issue with SEO. No one but the user knows what the user wants to see, the content trying to adjust itself to appear in the results more consistently isn't about helping the user find what they want, it's about making sure the user sees that specific content.

Because every website wants traffic. That's all it is.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Every site wants traffic, and I've been guilty of gaming search results myself in the past, but also don't forget the other big conflict here:

Google wants ad revenue.

As such, if you are small and do it honestly, you have very little chance of getting any actual traffic your way because Google sends everyone to the "big end of town" and search engines / internet marketing has become a pay to win platform.

Back links made sense when we were all linking to each other early on because it was how you found good content, but nobody is linking to anyone anymore - unless it's for some return to the linker, such as making a high traffic blog post with affiliate links etc - and it's time to come up with another method.

Right now most effective for me to get information / reviews is add "Reddit" to the search and you get a discussion of the pros and cons. I've been using chatgpt for a surprising amount of "I just need to know this general info" kind of stuff. Ie I used chatgpt to work out the temperature and time it would take to dehydrate lemons in the oven, and also how to clean said oven with what I had on hand. Both of these would have been much more time consuming to do the traditional way, and I would have been bombarded with ads and people's life stories before they get to the "just use vinegar" part

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The problem is that monied interests want to control the spin on information, just as General Electric was able to strictly govern television news during the cold war, and the George W. Bush administration and the military industrial complex wanted to control the newspapers and news sites during the war on terror (and game reviews occasionally gave below 7.0 out of 10)

Truth leaks to the people though novel means of communication, sadly with all the rumors. And any time a fact-checking service develops a reputation for veracity, it's going to face pressure to close, such as Snopes; or pressure to adhere to company marketing guidelines such as Wikipedia, for whom Kelloggs Company and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints both have a marketing subdepartment devoted to assuring no controversies or elaborations will stay on their respective Wikipedia pages without a generous dollop of hagiography.

So yes, figuring out the real deal is still an art form like processing data to get intel. For old stuff (e.g. Brigham Young's randy exploits seducing young girls with religious mandates) we look for the theses that point to primary sources. But for new stuff, we cross-examine multiple news reports for the consistent facts, and avoid interpretation.

As for product information, yes it's often to find out important stuff like how secure your IoT appliance is. You can assume it's not unless they can specify how they made it so without buzzwords.

[–] [email protected] 142 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Extensions help a ton. Some of my favorites:

Block or Highlight Search Engine Results - Does what the name says. When you run a search on Google or DDG or whatever engine you use, and you get a result from a shit website, add it to the filter and you'll never see that trash again. I filter out the following trash: chegg, timesmojo, coursehero, numerade, forbes, instagram, and pinterest. I've only been using this one for a little bit, so I expect that list will grow a LOT, but even with just those removed from my search results, HOLY HELL has the quality of my searches has increased. This one is probably the most relevant to OP's question.

Dictionary Anywhere - For vocab. Double-click any word on the web, and a little text bubble pops up with its definition - works on words in that bubble too, for when you run into shit like "Redundancy: the state of being redundant." -_- double click the "redundant" in the bubble to get a second bubble with a more useful definition. (doesn't happen often, but it's a cool feature, so worth calling out)

Fandom Enhance - For videogames, since every game wiki is on Fandom for some reason. This extension scrubs a LOT of the unnecessary clutter from the page.

Recipe Filter - Works with recipe websites. Scrubs out the 528 page life story from the author and reduces it down to just "Grilled cheese: bread, cheese, butter. Put butter on two pieces of bread. Put a slice of cheese in between. Put it on a griddle at 250 degrees for 2 mins. Flip it over, two more mins. Eat that sum' bitch." ✔

Youtube-shorts block. Youtube shorts NEVER have good content - get that TikTok shit outa here.

uBlock Origin - This one's a HEAVY lifter for taking the trash out of the internet. This will improve both the quality of information on screen by removing a TON of sketchy shit, and make your browsing a lot safer by filtering out malicious links. If you're not already using uBlock and take nothing else from this post, TAKE THIS ONE.

...that's pretty much it on my end, but there's a lot of other useful extensions out there. If anyone else has one to add, by all means let's keep this ball rolling!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Well damn. Thank you. Saving this! I have Ublock origin already. I’m excited about the other suggestions too!

Pinterest is half the fucking google image search. Bye! And the other half is shopping ads. Google can kiss my grits.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 65 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Stick to sites you know. If you're looking for a review and you get a hit on a site you don't know there's a better than 50% chance it's just an ad generated site (and frequently these days just the output from chatgpt).

Sucks for lesser known sites that are trying to get noticed, but unless google work out a way of removing the crap from feeds that's the way it is.

Same with youtube.. unless you trust the reviewer, assume it's paid unless there's good evidence otherwise.

Search for reddit/lemmy mentions specifically.. although those can be astroturfed too.. but the comments are generally helpful.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

You hit the nail on the head, mate!

In previous times, I used to follow certain sites more closely, but then life happened and I lost track of things and now several sites have closed and I don't know where to start.

For example, I used to dig GameSpy for game reviews, but it closed down. I rarely buy games these days, but I don't know what to read when I do and want to inform myself (I remember IGN, but I don't know if it's good). I can check out reviews on Steam, but they're short reviews.

Same deal goes for PC reviews or computer accessories. I don't know where to look: everything looks like an ad site. I remember PCmag.com but I don't know if itself is an ad site or what to compare it to, if I wanted to check a second opinion. Every YouTube video about technology feels like a sponsored ad, though some are legit

Edit: fixed grammar

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For videogames specifically, I usually turn to these sources for reliable advice:

  • Eurogamer and other reputable media outlets I've been following for years, so I know their journalists well and their tastes
  • Metacritic and GameFAQs
  • Watch streamers play the game I'm interested in for a while and make up my own mind as to whether I like what I see or not
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Don’t stick to one channel. Don’t get your news from social media, because social media is an echo chamber.

Use an RSS feed aggregator app to consolidate boring news articles from multiple boring publications. This will give you an even spread.

You will see the same news stories from different news outlets with different spin. You will quickly come to understand various news publishers biases and how extreme they are.

Always go into an article with an understanding of the publishers biases that might be at play.

If you must do the news on social thing… Only use social to discuss stories you already understand to some degree. Or as a place to research the news topic deeper.

For the most part, just use social to hang with your communities… you know… like a social network :)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (14 children)

What do you recommend for an RSS app?

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Lemmings are going to crucify me for this, but here goes anyway...

site:www.reddit.com

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair. One day that recommendation will end up being a lemmy instance instead.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I mean, technically it should work if you use an instance that is federated with most other instances.

E.g.:

For some reason, it doesn't work for lemmy.ca, indexing may be disabled. So YMMV.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Perfectly understandable imo. Reddit has been around for ages and has a huge backlog of information that users aggregated. Can't really expect Lemmy to match that after only (somewhat) taking off not that long ago. And i won't fault anyone for using this accumulated knowledge, i can't quite avoid it myself.

For me the big question is where people contribute new things. And considering how reddit is behaving, Lemmy/the Fediverse is the far better place to do so.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I go on 4chan and insult the product/thing/person that I need info on. Then I wait, rubbing my uhhh hands like a perv behind the tree.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mostly Google-fu and a strong Spidey sense of links that look like they'll waste your time.

Type stuff into Google.

Scroll down until you find something that looks like a forum. Random PHPBB boards, Stack Overflow, Reddit, old Experts Exchange topics, etc. Or a wiki page.

If it isn't one of those two things, it's probably AI generated blogspam with a dozen adverts on it.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Google-fu is no longer valid

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, it’s all been exploited by SEO. Search was always doomed to turn to shit. It’s an escalation game that never ends.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

I use Kagi and it's just amazing. Don't have any problems. You can also configure Kagi to prioritize certain sites and remove others you don't care about. Very happy with it.

The bullshit is because Google wants you to visit shitty sites because of ad revenues.

Throw them out of your life.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's becoming a lost art ... but basically, you need to go by reputation. Pick well known sites that you trust, compare what they say about the subject, don't even base your opinion on just one random blog article or tweet / reddit / lemmy post.

For some, Wikipedia is trustworthy since it (usually) cites its sources and has a pretty good track record, while for others it's not to be trusted, cause anyone can edit it. In the end it's up to you what you trust. Another example: The CDC (in the US) can be considered trustworthy for health information, being an official government agency, but many also don't trust it as it has become more politicised and so, biased. Again, you decide what to trust, and always consult at least two trusted sources, more is better.

For product reviews, I simply don't pay much attention to the star rating, but instead, read the actual reviews, and sort them chronologically so I read the most recent ones. Check that they are actually reviewing the product / service you think they are, as there are ways to get good reviews then "switch" the product listing (amazon) and other similar tricks. Check if it seems plausible, level-headed, or if it's just someone being angry, or likely fake. Like I said, it's an art, not a science. Sometimes, you have to actually buy the product / service and judge for yourself, then compare your experience with the reviews, and you'll learn to tell the truthful reviews from the fake or unreliable.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A tip regarding Wikipedia is to check the edit history if the last edit was made very recently since it could be spam that no one spotted yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (15 children)

Back in the day, Wikipedia was so neutral that they had people arguing how to write articles from a non-human POV. Yes, certain articles get political, but that is when the talk page arguments, counter-arguments, and linked ARBICOM evidence pages give you a good lesson on what people think are fact and opinion. I haven't been a editor for a while, is wikipedia not a hotbed of nerds who have to be in alignment with the facts regardless of what current political discourse says is right nowadays?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

so neutral that they had people arguing how to write articles from a non-human POV.

Academics have since acknowledged the impossibility of achieving this fantasy "unbiased" perspective.

give you a good lesson on what people think are fact and opinion.

This has been such an incredible change to Wikipedia's work, allowing dedicated spaces to talking about rhetoric and talking points for readers to learn.

facts regardless of what current political discourse says is right

Yeah, more or less. We are always free to check the sources, which is also a part of what Wikipedia nerds debate - what is the best resource to link to for those who need more info?

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have found some pretty neat information here on Lemmy, specifically talking about Android, Firefox and Linux.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We have stuff that is not Linux, too.

I don't know where we keep any of that, but I'm like 80% sure we have it somewhere.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I do better via DuckDuckGo than Google these days.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I use SearXNG to search for things, with custom redirects and block lists.

If I want a genuine human opinion on a topic, I add "site:reddit.com" to the search. Hopefully someday there will be a good way to parse the fediverse for info.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I just search ddg and get my results. I don't get those affiliates, top 10 lists, or whatever you're talking about. I just get good results, and if I don't then I try using Google.

Another tip that basically works with all search engines. Mark a word in "quotes" to have results require that word in the page. Helps you narrow results down if you need something specific.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You’re asking about a pretty tough problem, and I don’t have the silver bullet for that one. However, I do have some tools that might help you out a bit. None of these tools are 100% reliable, so take everything with a grain of salt.

Fakespot and reviewmeta can help weeding out some of the junk reviews.

When I have a lot of text to go through, I just dump all of it on chatGPT or Bing and ask for a summary. It’s a language model after all, so it should be pretty good at this sort of thing. A horse won’t plow a field all by itself, but if you’re there to steer it, it will get the job done faster than you would.

When I’m looking for a good book to read, I’ll usually use the reviews of goodreads. Just skip all the 5-star reviews, because they are usually written by people who aren’t competent at reviewing books. Take all the the 1-4 star reviews dump them on your favorite LLM and let it look for frequently reoccurring complaints.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Try to search for something that has been in the News. Even if that news article is NOT what you want... It's going to be the only thing offered . Over and over and over.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's an interesting blog post on this subject (likely someone posted it already): https://dkb.blog/p/google-search-is-dying

I find it to be very agreeable. Search is dying and I don't agree that appending "site:reddit.com" is any kind of permanent solution, just a workaround that will also break.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Through Cunningham's Law.

I let people smarter than me on Lemmy and in chat rooms tell me wtf is going on in ways I can understand. If I need that info for a paper, I can always just say something stupid and get like 50 people correcting me with accurate info and sources. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

I follow some reviewers on YouTube, Project Farm is a great one.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

On programming topics, your top search results will be stack overflow followed github followed by sites that scrape stack overflow and then the sites that scrape github. It's great.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Keep a log of anything you do successfully find that you may need later.

I’ve started bookmarking anything I do find genuinely useful as there’s a chance that the a similar search would yield different results that wouldn’t help at all.

I’ve also installed archivebox on one of my home lab pcs to grab a snapshot of any sites and pages that I want to keep (you never know if you’ll go back and it’s gone).

Retaining good information for yourself is just as important on the web now given all the bot spam and affiliate laden shit out there that Google and Bing seem to be promoting these days.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Kinda glad that I kept most of my university textbooks and have a bunch of encyclopaedias and shit lying around.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›