@ajsadauskas@aus.social

ajsadauskas

@ajsadauskas@aus.social

Australian urban planning, public transport, politics, retrocomputing, and tech nerd. Recovering journo. Cat parent. Part-time miserable grump.

Cities for people, not cars! Tech for people, not investors!

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

ajsadauskas, to random

In an age of LLMs, is it time to reconsider human-edited web directories?

Back in the early-to-mid '90s, one of the main ways of finding anything on the web was to browse through a web directory.

These directories generally had a list of categories on their front page. News/Sport/Entertainment/Arts/Technology/Fashion/etc.

Each of those categories had subcategories, and sub-subcategories that you clicked through until you got to a list of websites. These lists were maintained by actual humans.

Typically, these directories also had a limited web search that would crawl through the pages of websites listed in the directory.

Lycos, Excite, and of course Yahoo all offered web directories of this sort.

(EDIT: I initially also mentioned AltaVista. It did offer a web directory by the late '90s, but this was something it tacked on much later.)

By the late '90s, the standard narrative goes, the web got too big to index websites manually.

Google promised the world its algorithms would weed out the spam automatically.

And for a time, it worked.

But then SEO and SEM became a multi-billion-dollar industry. The spambots proliferated. Google itself began promoting its own content and advertisers above search results.

And now with LLMs, the industrial-scale spamming of the web is likely to grow exponentially.

My question is, if a lot of the web is turning to crap, do we even want to search the entire web anymore?

Do we really want to search every single website on the web?

Or just those that aren't filled with LLM-generated SEO spam?

Or just those that don't feature 200 tracking scripts, and passive-aggressive privacy warnings, and paywalls, and popovers, and newsletters, and increasingly obnoxious banner ads, and dark patterns to prevent you cancelling your "free trial" subscription?

At some point, does it become more desirable to go back to search engines that only crawl pages on human-curated lists of trustworthy, quality websites?

And is it time to begin considering what a modern version of those early web directories might look like?

@degoogle

thomasfuchs, to random
@thomasfuchs@hachyderm.io avatar

No, generative AI will not give you personalized movies from a book. Not in 5 years, not in ever.

Just please listen to the fucking grift generative AI stans are trying to make you believe. Not a single word they’re saying has any merit whatsoever.

Generative AI is complete and utter shit. More computing resources will just generate more shit faster.

I don’t understand how these people aren’t laughed off the Internet, it’s such a transparent bullshit hype.

ajsadauskas,

@RedCyberPandaz @thomasfuchs It would be interesting to do a study of exactly what percentage of LLM/"AI" grifters were pushing web3/NFTs/the metaverse/blockchain just a couple of years ago.

Certainly, there's no shortage of big name VCs and tech bosses who've jumped from one bandwagon to the other. Think Andreessen, Thiel, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc.

I suspect it's largely the same people who have jumped from one tech grift to the next.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • Hentai
  • doujinshi
  • announcements
  • general
  • All magazines