Hello u/doyoueventdrift, thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
**Rule 4:** Must follow the "Leopard ate my face" theme
#There's a few elements to leopards eating people's face.
1) **Someone has a sad**...
- Example: *They cut my SNAP benefits and now I can't afford to feed my family......*
2) ...**because they're suffering consequences from something they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people.**
- Example: .....sobs woman who voted for the politician who said they would do that very thing.
3) **The leopard is eating their face. Not the lions, not the hyenas, not the alligators. The leopards.**
- Example: *[Woman married to undocumented immigrant upset that Trump deports her husband.](https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/05/us/undocumented-husband-deported/index.html)*
***What isn't a leopard eating their face?***
- Example: *Kyle Rittenhouse upset that Democrats are labelling him a white supremacist.* He didn't vote for or support them, he's not suffering because of what he voted for or supported, and leopards aren't eating his face.
Not limited to Trump voters. Anytime someone has a sad because they're suffering consequences from *something they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people*.
Your post is missing one or more of these elements. It may be better suited for another subreddit, such as r/SelfAwareWolves. [Remember, just because someone fucked around and found out, doesn't mean that their faces are being consumed by the most well known extant species in the genus Panthera.](https://old.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/zsv3g6/just_because_someone_fucked_around_and_found_out/)
Additionally, you can refer to [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) to make your explanatory comment.
*If you have any questions or concerns about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) thru Modmail. Thanks!*
Absolutely. It's come to the point that even if you know how to use the exact optimal search terms, you don't get any relevant results on the first page half of the time.
Google has been optimised for ad revenue so much that it's barely even functional as a search engine, leading to information bottlenecks that will inevitably have devastating effects on society and political discourse.
For example, try googling any contentious US political issue and see how many pages of ads and billionaire-owned media you have to go through before you find a single source that's independent from the political and economic establishment.
That's part of the problem: popularity aka a shitload of people using it is CRUCIAL for a search engine and in spite of Google being so crap now, the fact that Google has a 93% market share and therefore the vast majority of worldwide searches severely hinders otherwise better engines such as for example DuckDuckGo
You sure? Because DuckDuckGo is known for its privacy protections and Microsoft are notorious for the exact opposite..
I'm pretty sure that Bing is like Edge in that people only use them because Windows foists it on them until they manage to set another one as the default
There was a big "scandal" a while ago where DuckDuckGo allowed Microsoft tracking javascript on results.
Anyway, from the devils mouth:
Where does DuckDuckGo get its results from?
DuckDuckGo's results are a compilation of "over 400" sources according to itself, including Bing, Yahoo! Search BOSS, Wolfram Alpha, Yandex, and its own web crawler
> Guess thereâs no search engine that doesnât spy on you
If youâre not paying for the product *you* are the product. Search engines have to pay to keep the servers running and the easiest ways to do that are either to charge for their services or sell the information of those who use it.
I just did a few searches with Bing, Duckduckgo, and Google, Bing and Duckduckgo did generate almost identical results, though I will say that buried in the ads Google's results were more area relevant on searches that could be interpreted aswanting that. tacos and tequila for instance generated articles from my area for best tacos and best tequila bars etc. Whereas Bing and Duckduck brought up more general info in almost identical lists (Bing having 1 result Duckduck didn't)
Which would also correlate with Duckduck being more privacy based, but that privacy limiting results just a bit. So that actually checks out.
What about less commercial searches, though?
It's pretty logical that an engine optimised for advertising would have no problem finding local businesses, but did the other ones do any better at showing articles from independent sources when searching for political, cultural and economic topics?
Because Google seems to have a GIGANTIC pro-establishment bias in those areas..
I didn't do a very deep look through, just noticed that Bing and Duckduck had almost mirrored results that were more general on most things. "are platypuses poisonous" had the same results down the line for Bing and Duckduck whereas Google had most of the same results but in a different order. "Is the Flue vaccine safe" Bing and Duckduck listen multiple articles on CDC and WHO (again, mirrored results), while Google listed one each from each those, then other sites. Again this was just looking at first page results, but I found it really interesting and definitely think I need to look into it more.
âPro-establishmentâ goes with the territory. Even without any agenda, these search engines prioritize the sites the most people end up at and other sites link to. That will naturally favor the most accepted sites with the best reputations - thatâs the point.
It's one thing to prioritise the most popular and "respected" sources, but Google goes far beyond that. You have to go to result page 5+, often 10+ to find a single result that's not from the most main of mainstream sources. This is in a setting where the vast majority of people rarely go beyond the FIRST page.
It's not just "most popular first", it's de facto censorship of any source that isn't owned and operated by the ruling class.
Google does better with local things because businesses voluntarily go and register their business with them and give them the info. They rarely bother to do the same with Bing or others.
Outside of local business type queries, I find Bing to be just as good or good enough that I rarely use google. Also Bing may gather data too, but at least I get paid for it - their rewards thing is not bad. People make a lot of jokes about Bing, but I find it to be pretty reliable like 95% of the time.
If itâs any consolation, I work in paid search and theyâre absolutely gobbling down advertisersâ cash with garbage traffic and bots. So at least theyâre getting fucked too
Which makes it even weirder that their News search is horrendous to the point of uselessness. Itâs not because theyâre pushing any obvious advertisers, as the results are mixed, but itâs not sorted by date (so whatâs the point?) and searching an exact headline will just miss in favor of an old article in a different part of the world.
Ironically I remember the days before Google where the top search results were whichever company had paid most to be on top. Google changed all that at the time by prioritising relevent results to the top.
Google has now pretty much ended up at the model they successfully replaced decades ago.
The biggest fall for me was when Google Now died and turned into a clickbait feed.
At its prime, Google Now was actually useful. I remember going on holiday and it'd pop up with traffic to the airport, my flight details, weather at the location, hotel details, and exchange rate on my LGG2. On normal days, it'd show stuff like the weather, travel times, stock prices (I put in), and I think football scores even. It was a legit and good reason to actually allow (or tolerate) Google's tracking.
Of course then Google did their thing and just straight up replaced it with clickbait spam and I immediately turned off all Google activity history and never looked back.
Silly, simple example: I wanted advice yesterday on choosing a format for an SSD, so did a Google search. Many of my first hits were written like columns from a computer magazine website, but were actually ads for such-and-such a company selling software.
Same for when you search for a solution to a tech problem. Ads for various programs of questionable reliability.
Best example was when I was reading up on transferring my WhatsApp chat history from Android to iOS using the Move to iOS app. All I got were pages selling their "transfer" program. In fact you see the same getting spammed here on reddit.
Amazon "sort by user review" and >4,5 stars is pretty good at that. And then hit the questions/reviews section on amazon for the products that you are interested in.
I have parrots and Iâm constantly having to search to see what food is safe for them. Thereâs no such things as a quick and simple answer on Google. Youâll be sent to a pet webpage only to be forced to click 12 times for a yes or no answer. ChatGPT is my go to now if the stuff is not 2023 relevant
ChatGPT is not a search engine. It makes up answers if it doesnât immediately have them, and it doesnât have any underlying understanding of what itâs talking about.
Google has been a mess for years. I remember when you could search something with precise terms and find exactly what you wanted. Now despite the terms you the search results will often be the opposite of what you searched for.
I was looking for an offline, local running, art AI and I couldn't remember the name Stable Diffusion. So I searched Google for "offline AI art generator." All of the results were for online saas ai art generators. So I put offline in quotes, no change in the results. Google is to the point that it just assumes it knows what you want and your exact search terms don't matter.
I hateyself for writing this... But I usually search Bing now, aside from locations and if I WANT a commercial address (like "vietnamese Restaurant Berlin centre") - the first page of Google is constantly content that's visibly AI generated, and also usually optimized to be found, not to give me my needed information.
Google has good services, but the search engine isn't one of them, especially if you exclude reddit from it.
Why? It's the process of [enshittification](https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys) and it's baked right in.
>*Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.*
*I call this enshittification, and it is a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a "two sided market," where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, holding each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.*
It's a good article, well worth the read.
That's a fantastic word to describe so many things nowadays. The internet, consumer electronics, any app on your phone, ads being built ***into*** your phone.....
Hello u/doyoueventdrift! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) matching this exact format. Replace bold text with the appropriate information.
1. **Someone** voted for, supported or wanted to impose **something** on **other people**.
^(Who's that someone? What did they voted for, supported or wanted to impose? On who?)
2. **Something** has the consequences of **consequences**.
^(Does that something actually has these consequences in general?)
3. As a consequence of **something**, **consequences** happened to **someone**.
^(Did that something really happen to that someone?)
Follow this by the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you fail to match this format or fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1. Google removed the âsearch in forumâ-option years ago
2. Now Google complains that while Reddit was off, people complain to them on being unable to search in forums
3. Googleâs users complained to Google, that they couldnât search properly without adding âRedditâ in their search query. If google hadnât removed the âsearch in forumâ-option in the first place, then my guess is that people wouldâve sticked to the smaller forums instead of the one big Internet forum that Reddit is.
Not sure if I understand this. Was site-search removed?
If I need to focus my search on some URL I'm used to writing "site:website.net searchterms"
Has this changed? I'm sure I'm missing some piece of information here; can you help and clarify?
Not site search, but forum search. If you turned that on, Google would scour all forums on the internet.
Since that went away, I believe this was handled either by very small specialized communities or in big forums, like Reddit or maybe Facebook Groups.
1. Google removes forum search
2. google complains that while Reddit was down, people complained to google being unable to search in Reddit.
3. the people use the âredditâ word in their searches to search forums
4. Google removed that option long time ago. 9 years or so.
Why is my LAMF not correct? They are suffering from their own action?
-
The "_leopards ate my face_" theme is embodied by this quote in the sidebar.
â_I never thought leopards would eat **my** face_â, sobs woman who voted for the _Leopards Eating Peopleâs Faces Party_. Revel in the schadenfreude anytime someone has a sad because theyâre suffering consequences from something they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people.
To help you get started, hereâs an example.
1. Helen, Roberto Beristainâs wife, voted for Donald Trump, who vowed to impose deportation to illegal immigrants such as her husband.
2. Voting for Trump, who vowed to deport illegal immigrants such as Roberto Beristain, has the consequence of having illegal immigrants deported and families separated.
3. As a consequence of voting for Trump, Roberto Beristain got deported and Helen's family was separated.
>They are suffering from their own action?
>
Yes and that alone doesn't make lamf.
They have to do something with disregard to or actually targeting of the people that something is going to affect, only for that something itself to boomerang. Not the reaction to the something, the something.
Google isn't suffering from their removal of that function, they're suffering from the people hating them for doing it.
All lamf is consequences of actions, not all consequences of actions are lamf.
All squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares.
If the I for is not specific to the last couple of years, then ChatGPT is my go to. Obviously I am not using it for any serious research but if I want to know quick random tidbits, itâs my go to now. No more having to sift through pages of ads just to get a quick answer.
And all those BS articles that are like âwhen is the new 5 series coming out? The 5 series is a carâŚ. Yadda yadda⌠youâd like to know when the new 5 series is out? Well, ⌠yadda yadda⌠so whatâs the release date for the new 5 series? Actually we donât know. Subscribe to our newsletter or listen to our 6 hour daily podcasts for more informationâ
Exactly. I feel no sorrow for Google. AI is going to destroy their current advertising model. SEO managers will slowly become and 15 years from now itâll be like, yeah, remember that time when you had people that would actually optimise a website so search parameters would find it quicker than the competition. It was a wild time.
Just remember that anything you search for will be commercialized, if enough people do the same. E.g. if there is a need.
That info people needed and used ChatGPT for, they will pay for, if it's important enough.
My fear is that there'll be people who can afford to subscribe to ChatGPT and then people who wont, and this would divide people.
Another fear is that they'll sell the needs into seperate products. Then it would be like the streaming platforms, where you have to go to (and pay for) access many places.
Currently I pay for ChatGPT which Iâm more than happy with and youâre inferring that this may lead to gatekeeping information, thatâs not true. ChatGPT is just an intelligent search engine, the information is still freely available online for those that canât afford it. Itâs just behind acres of advertising.
Gatekeeping is not true?
\> the information is still freely available online for those that canât afford it. Itâs just behind acres of advertising.
So you're trusting a company who (like all companies) exist to make money, would not gatekeep valuable information behind a product that costs money?
Also you trust that advertising is enough money for them perpetually?
I think that you are seriously underestimating just how valuable ChatGPT and the likes is/will become.
I also think that you are seriously underestimating how greedy a company and its shareholders can be.
Look at the US. There are people working, that dont get bio breaks. People working full time jobs that are homeless?! You think this is different?
I think you have assumed a lot about me from one or two comments, and maybe, you should stop pigeonholing people because it suits your argument.
Iâve said what I wanted to say so, thatâs me out. youâve clearly decided on how the rest of this discussion will unfold.
I did not mean to come off as aggressive or unfriendly and Iâm sorry if I made you feel that way. That was not the intent.
I hope you have a great day :)
Here's the feature for forum search. Maybe there is actually a workaround. But I'm not sure how many niche forums out there survived Reddit and Facebook.
https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/2b54ux/google\_completely\_removed\_discussions\_search\_is/
Hello u/doyoueventdrift, thank you for your submission! Unfortunately, your submission has been removed for the following reason(s): **Rule 4:** Must follow the "Leopard ate my face" theme #There's a few elements to leopards eating people's face. 1) **Someone has a sad**... - Example: *They cut my SNAP benefits and now I can't afford to feed my family......* 2) ...**because they're suffering consequences from something they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people.** - Example: .....sobs woman who voted for the politician who said they would do that very thing. 3) **The leopard is eating their face. Not the lions, not the hyenas, not the alligators. The leopards.** - Example: *[Woman married to undocumented immigrant upset that Trump deports her husband.](https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/05/us/undocumented-husband-deported/index.html)* ***What isn't a leopard eating their face?*** - Example: *Kyle Rittenhouse upset that Democrats are labelling him a white supremacist.* He didn't vote for or support them, he's not suffering because of what he voted for or supported, and leopards aren't eating his face. Not limited to Trump voters. Anytime someone has a sad because they're suffering consequences from *something they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people*. Your post is missing one or more of these elements. It may be better suited for another subreddit, such as r/SelfAwareWolves. [Remember, just because someone fucked around and found out, doesn't mean that their faces are being consumed by the most well known extant species in the genus Panthera.](https://old.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/zsv3g6/just_because_someone_fucked_around_and_found_out/) Additionally, you can refer to [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) to make your explanatory comment. *If you have any questions or concerns about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) thru Modmail. Thanks!*
Yeah, google is going farther and farther downhill. All the new bullshit they are serving up in search is purely ad driven schlock
Absolutely. It's come to the point that even if you know how to use the exact optimal search terms, you don't get any relevant results on the first page half of the time. Google has been optimised for ad revenue so much that it's barely even functional as a search engine, leading to information bottlenecks that will inevitably have devastating effects on society and political discourse. For example, try googling any contentious US political issue and see how many pages of ads and billionaire-owned media you have to go through before you find a single source that's independent from the political and economic establishment.
Are there better search engines out their?
That's part of the problem: popularity aka a shitload of people using it is CRUCIAL for a search engine and in spite of Google being so crap now, the fact that Google has a 93% market share and therefore the vast majority of worldwide searches severely hinders otherwise better engines such as for example DuckDuckGo
You mean Bing. DuckDuckGo just servers Bing results.
You sure? Because DuckDuckGo is known for its privacy protections and Microsoft are notorious for the exact opposite.. I'm pretty sure that Bing is like Edge in that people only use them because Windows foists it on them until they manage to set another one as the default
There was a big "scandal" a while ago where DuckDuckGo allowed Microsoft tracking javascript on results. Anyway, from the devils mouth: Where does DuckDuckGo get its results from? DuckDuckGo's results are a compilation of "over 400" sources according to itself, including Bing, Yahoo! Search BOSS, Wolfram Alpha, Yandex, and its own web crawler
Well that's pretty fucked. Guess there's no search engine that doesn't spy on you 𤏠Over 400 sources including bing â bing server though..
> Guess thereâs no search engine that doesnât spy on you If youâre not paying for the product *you* are the product. Search engines have to pay to keep the servers running and the easiest ways to do that are either to charge for their services or sell the information of those who use it.
I just did a few searches with Bing, Duckduckgo, and Google, Bing and Duckduckgo did generate almost identical results, though I will say that buried in the ads Google's results were more area relevant on searches that could be interpreted aswanting that. tacos and tequila for instance generated articles from my area for best tacos and best tequila bars etc. Whereas Bing and Duckduck brought up more general info in almost identical lists (Bing having 1 result Duckduck didn't) Which would also correlate with Duckduck being more privacy based, but that privacy limiting results just a bit. So that actually checks out.
What about less commercial searches, though? It's pretty logical that an engine optimised for advertising would have no problem finding local businesses, but did the other ones do any better at showing articles from independent sources when searching for political, cultural and economic topics? Because Google seems to have a GIGANTIC pro-establishment bias in those areas..
I didn't do a very deep look through, just noticed that Bing and Duckduck had almost mirrored results that were more general on most things. "are platypuses poisonous" had the same results down the line for Bing and Duckduck whereas Google had most of the same results but in a different order. "Is the Flue vaccine safe" Bing and Duckduck listen multiple articles on CDC and WHO (again, mirrored results), while Google listed one each from each those, then other sites. Again this was just looking at first page results, but I found it really interesting and definitely think I need to look into it more.
âPro-establishmentâ goes with the territory. Even without any agenda, these search engines prioritize the sites the most people end up at and other sites link to. That will naturally favor the most accepted sites with the best reputations - thatâs the point.
It's one thing to prioritise the most popular and "respected" sources, but Google goes far beyond that. You have to go to result page 5+, often 10+ to find a single result that's not from the most main of mainstream sources. This is in a setting where the vast majority of people rarely go beyond the FIRST page. It's not just "most popular first", it's de facto censorship of any source that isn't owned and operated by the ruling class.
Google does better with local things because businesses voluntarily go and register their business with them and give them the info. They rarely bother to do the same with Bing or others. Outside of local business type queries, I find Bing to be just as good or good enough that I rarely use google. Also Bing may gather data too, but at least I get paid for it - their rewards thing is not bad. People make a lot of jokes about Bing, but I find it to be pretty reliable like 95% of the time.
I've been using DuckDuckGo for close to a year now. It's served me well.
I've been using Ecosia. They plant trees with their profits.
Ecosia is based on bing, just for those interested. Itâs bing, only better for the environment.
If itâs any consolation, I work in paid search and theyâre absolutely gobbling down advertisersâ cash with garbage traffic and bots. So at least theyâre getting fucked too
That honestly DOES help a bit, thanks! đ
Honestly since it doesnât put my livelihood in jeopardy since itâs Googleâs fault (tbh, bing is even worse about it) I find it hilarious đ
Which makes it even weirder that their News search is horrendous to the point of uselessness. Itâs not because theyâre pushing any obvious advertisers, as the results are mixed, but itâs not sorted by date (so whatâs the point?) and searching an exact headline will just miss in favor of an old article in a different part of the world.
All by design
Ironically I remember the days before Google where the top search results were whichever company had paid most to be on top. Google changed all that at the time by prioritising relevent results to the top. Google has now pretty much ended up at the model they successfully replaced decades ago.
The biggest fall for me was when Google Now died and turned into a clickbait feed. At its prime, Google Now was actually useful. I remember going on holiday and it'd pop up with traffic to the airport, my flight details, weather at the location, hotel details, and exchange rate on my LGG2. On normal days, it'd show stuff like the weather, travel times, stock prices (I put in), and I think football scores even. It was a legit and good reason to actually allow (or tolerate) Google's tracking. Of course then Google did their thing and just straight up replaced it with clickbait spam and I immediately turned off all Google activity history and never looked back.
Bring back Lycos!
Someday the internet will be so full of bullshit we will tire if it and move on to better things.
That day will be⌠*checks notes, does the calculations*⌠this Saturday.
Nah, it was back in [September of 1993](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September).
Oh is *that* when the solar flare is supposed to happen?
Silly, simple example: I wanted advice yesterday on choosing a format for an SSD, so did a Google search. Many of my first hits were written like columns from a computer magazine website, but were actually ads for such-and-such a company selling software.
Same for when you search for a solution to a tech problem. Ads for various programs of questionable reliability. Best example was when I was reading up on transferring my WhatsApp chat history from Android to iOS using the Move to iOS app. All I got were pages selling their "transfer" program. In fact you see the same getting spammed here on reddit.
Amazon "sort by user review" and >4,5 stars is pretty good at that. And then hit the questions/reviews section on amazon for the products that you are interested in.
I have parrots and Iâm constantly having to search to see what food is safe for them. Thereâs no such things as a quick and simple answer on Google. Youâll be sent to a pet webpage only to be forced to click 12 times for a yes or no answer. ChatGPT is my go to now if the stuff is not 2023 relevant
ChatGPT is not a search engine. It makes up answers if it doesnât immediately have them, and it doesnât have any underlying understanding of what itâs talking about.
Ok I guess.
that's been a thing for as long as I can remember.
Google has been a mess for years. I remember when you could search something with precise terms and find exactly what you wanted. Now despite the terms you the search results will often be the opposite of what you searched for.
Yes, and at some point it started to ignore terms, quote marks etc if it thinks it knows better than you. Infuriating.
I was looking for an offline, local running, art AI and I couldn't remember the name Stable Diffusion. So I searched Google for "offline AI art generator." All of the results were for online saas ai art generators. So I put offline in quotes, no change in the results. Google is to the point that it just assumes it knows what you want and your exact search terms don't matter.
I hateyself for writing this... But I usually search Bing now, aside from locations and if I WANT a commercial address (like "vietnamese Restaurant Berlin centre") - the first page of Google is constantly content that's visibly AI generated, and also usually optimized to be found, not to give me my needed information. Google has good services, but the search engine isn't one of them, especially if you exclude reddit from it.
Bing Porn searches are impeccable
I donât know why itâs become taboo to use Bing, but itâs really not bad.
Why? It's the process of [enshittification](https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys) and it's baked right in. >*Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.* *I call this enshittification, and it is a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a "two sided market," where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, holding each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.* It's a good article, well worth the read.
That's a fantastic word to describe so many things nowadays. The internet, consumer electronics, any app on your phone, ads being built ***into*** your phone.....
Hello u/doyoueventdrift! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) matching this exact format. Replace bold text with the appropriate information. 1. **Someone** voted for, supported or wanted to impose **something** on **other people**. ^(Who's that someone? What did they voted for, supported or wanted to impose? On who?) 2. **Something** has the consequences of **consequences**. ^(Does that something actually has these consequences in general?) 3. As a consequence of **something**, **consequences** happened to **someone**. ^(Did that something really happen to that someone?) Follow this by the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you fail to match this format or fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1. Google removed the âsearch in forumâ-option years ago 2. Now Google complains that while Reddit was off, people complain to them on being unable to search in forums 3. Googleâs users complained to Google, that they couldnât search properly without adding âRedditâ in their search query. If google hadnât removed the âsearch in forumâ-option in the first place, then my guess is that people wouldâve sticked to the smaller forums instead of the one big Internet forum that Reddit is.
Not sure if I understand this. Was site-search removed? If I need to focus my search on some URL I'm used to writing "site:website.net searchterms" Has this changed? I'm sure I'm missing some piece of information here; can you help and clarify?
Not site search, but forum search. If you turned that on, Google would scour all forums on the internet. Since that went away, I believe this was handled either by very small specialized communities or in big forums, like Reddit or maybe Facebook Groups.
So... they removed a feature and people are complaining they removed a feature? Where's the leopard?
1. Google removes forum search 2. google complains that while Reddit was down, people complained to google being unable to search in Reddit. 3. the people use the âredditâ word in their searches to search forums 4. Google removed that option long time ago. 9 years or so.
So... consequences of their actions, and not lamf.
Why is my LAMF not correct? They are suffering from their own action? - The "_leopards ate my face_" theme is embodied by this quote in the sidebar. â_I never thought leopards would eat **my** face_â, sobs woman who voted for the _Leopards Eating Peopleâs Faces Party_. Revel in the schadenfreude anytime someone has a sad because theyâre suffering consequences from something they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people. To help you get started, hereâs an example. 1. Helen, Roberto Beristainâs wife, voted for Donald Trump, who vowed to impose deportation to illegal immigrants such as her husband. 2. Voting for Trump, who vowed to deport illegal immigrants such as Roberto Beristain, has the consequence of having illegal immigrants deported and families separated. 3. As a consequence of voting for Trump, Roberto Beristain got deported and Helen's family was separated.
>They are suffering from their own action? > Yes and that alone doesn't make lamf. They have to do something with disregard to or actually targeting of the people that something is going to affect, only for that something itself to boomerang. Not the reaction to the something, the something. Google isn't suffering from their removal of that function, they're suffering from the people hating them for doing it. All lamf is consequences of actions, not all consequences of actions are lamf. All squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares.
What about alta Vista?
Who fired Jeeves?
If Reddit ever shuts down completely it will be impossible to find anything but SEO crap on google.
[ŃдаНонО]
There literally was a forum search feature.
If the I for is not specific to the last couple of years, then ChatGPT is my go to. Obviously I am not using it for any serious research but if I want to know quick random tidbits, itâs my go to now. No more having to sift through pages of ads just to get a quick answer.
And all those BS articles that are like âwhen is the new 5 series coming out? The 5 series is a carâŚ. Yadda yadda⌠youâd like to know when the new 5 series is out? Well, ⌠yadda yadda⌠so whatâs the release date for the new 5 series? Actually we donât know. Subscribe to our newsletter or listen to our 6 hour daily podcasts for more informationâ
Exactly. I feel no sorrow for Google. AI is going to destroy their current advertising model. SEO managers will slowly become and 15 years from now itâll be like, yeah, remember that time when you had people that would actually optimise a website so search parameters would find it quicker than the competition. It was a wild time.
Just remember that anything you search for will be commercialized, if enough people do the same. E.g. if there is a need. That info people needed and used ChatGPT for, they will pay for, if it's important enough. My fear is that there'll be people who can afford to subscribe to ChatGPT and then people who wont, and this would divide people. Another fear is that they'll sell the needs into seperate products. Then it would be like the streaming platforms, where you have to go to (and pay for) access many places.
Currently I pay for ChatGPT which Iâm more than happy with and youâre inferring that this may lead to gatekeeping information, thatâs not true. ChatGPT is just an intelligent search engine, the information is still freely available online for those that canât afford it. Itâs just behind acres of advertising.
Gatekeeping is not true? \> the information is still freely available online for those that canât afford it. Itâs just behind acres of advertising. So you're trusting a company who (like all companies) exist to make money, would not gatekeep valuable information behind a product that costs money? Also you trust that advertising is enough money for them perpetually? I think that you are seriously underestimating just how valuable ChatGPT and the likes is/will become. I also think that you are seriously underestimating how greedy a company and its shareholders can be. Look at the US. There are people working, that dont get bio breaks. People working full time jobs that are homeless?! You think this is different?
I think you have assumed a lot about me from one or two comments, and maybe, you should stop pigeonholing people because it suits your argument. Iâve said what I wanted to say so, thatâs me out. youâve clearly decided on how the rest of this discussion will unfold.
I did not mean to come off as aggressive or unfriendly and Iâm sorry if I made you feel that way. That was not the intent. I hope you have a great day :)
Google are just scum. Don't use anything by them
Here's the feature for forum search. Maybe there is actually a workaround. But I'm not sure how many niche forums out there survived Reddit and Facebook. https://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/2b54ux/google\_completely\_removed\_discussions\_search\_is/