• hoppolito@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I am fairly sure this is the actual point of the campaign. The selection bias for a ‘poll’ like this (one that instantly on-boards you to the ai-disabled version of your product if you click answer negative, no less) is so great that I don’t believe the suits/analysts at ddg ever envisioned a different result. Polls and comment sections lure the extreme viewpoints and the ddg crowd already skews privacy-conscious so this was a highly expected outcome.

      What the campaign does instead is:

      1. Show that you ‘care’ and ‘listen to feedback’ (by a response to the poll somewhere between disabling the ai by default to making the no-ai button a little bit bigger)
      2. show that you have the ability to turn off ai on your product in the first place to those who care
      3. like I said above, directly onboard people onto their preferred search strategy so that when relatives/friends send this around people get a little taste, and realize this exists

      It’s quite clever imo, and there’s no real bad outcome for what I assume is a pretty inexpensive campaign.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      If they take the poll to heart it can still be a sucess. They can advertise that they listened to their users and changed course.

      That’s the thing about really good marketing - it should not only drive users to use your service, but the reactions to that marketing can be used as market research to improve your product and future marketing in a manner that drives even more users to your product.

        • teft@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          Just edit the ddg entry instead of adding a new one. It’s super easy to change the url for the search in settings.

          • timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t know how you do that. I can’t edit the standard DDG on desktop at all. Didn’t see anything at first glance in about:config either.

            Easier to me to just add a new engine.

    • NotSteve_@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m pretty sure it asks you how often you want to see the AI overview doesn’t it? Can’t you just click never?

    • Egonallanon@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can turn all the AI features off on regular DDG search settings. Best I can tell that achuevescthe same as using the no AI filter.

      • Seleni@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Except it’s not very good. I turn it off and still get AI pictures and videos, and it gets rid of some pictures I know aren’t AI.

    • Logi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I like kagi’s approach of generating an AI overview if you end your query with a question mark. Is this a search or a question?

  • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    While no doubt it may be that most users of DuckDuckGo are anti-AI given the nature of the service and who it attracts, the 90% metric makes me believe that the people who ambivalently use DuckDuckGo’s AI (and are not pro or anti) did not vote in this at all and may find themselves using DuckDuckGo less if they see the surface-level convenience randomly disappear from the service.

    So I assume they’ll get rid of the AI and they’ll see a drop in users overtime as a percentage of minimum effort types get confused or annoyed. And then they’ll bring it back as they see a drop in users, annoy the users that hate AI and they’ll leave as well. And neither group will end up ever returning.

    This whole poll was a terrible idea.

    • Electricd@lemmybefree.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I switch away from DDG to brave because it had better search results and its AI summary was here first (iirc) and worked well

    • Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      You want to destroy our planet and pay way more in electricity for a random sentence generator to spit out slop?

  • dantheclamman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think LLMs are fine for specific uses. A useful technology for brainstorming, debugging code, generic code examples, etc. People are just weary of oligarchs mandating how we use technology. We want to be customers but they want to instead shape how we work, as if we are livestock

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Right? Like let me choose if and when I want to use it. Don’t shove it down our throats and then complain when we get upset or don’t use it how you want us to use it. We’ll use it however we want to use it, not you.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I should further add - don’t fucking use it in places it’s not capable of properly functioning and then trying to deflect the blame on the AI from yourself, like what Air Canada did.

        https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatbot-misinformation-what-travellers-should-know

        When Air Canada’s chatbot gave incorrect information to a traveller, the airline argued its chatbot is “responsible for its own actions”.

        Artificial intelligence is having a growing impact on the way we travel, and a remarkable new case shows what AI-powered chatbots can get wrong – and who should pay. In 2022, Air Canada’s chatbot promised a discount that wasn’t available to passenger Jake Moffatt, who was assured that he could book a full-fare flight for his grandmother’s funeral and then apply for a bereavement fare after the fact.

        According to a civil-resolutions tribunal decision last Wednesday, when Moffatt applied for the discount, the airline said the chatbot had been wrong – the request needed to be submitted before the flight – and it wouldn’t offer the discount. Instead, the airline said the chatbot was a “separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions”. Air Canada argued that Moffatt should have gone to the link provided by the chatbot, where he would have seen the correct policy.

        The British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal rejected that argument, ruling that Air Canada had to pay Moffatt $812.02 (£642.64) in damages and tribunal fees

        • Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          They were trying to argue that it was legally responsible for its own actions? Like, that it’s a person? And not even an employee at that? FFS

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            You just know they’re going to make a separate corporation, put the AI in it, and then contract it to themselves and try again.

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          …what kind of brain damage did the rep have to think that was a viable defense? surely their human customer service personnel are also responsible for their own actions?

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            It makes sense to do it, it’s just along the lines of evil company.

            If they lose, it’s some bad press and people will forget.

            If they win, they’ve begun setting precedent to fuck over their customers and earn more money. Even if it only had a 5% chance of success, it was probably worth it.

    • coffee_nutcase207@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s horrible for the environment too and wastes electricity. It’s fucked up that Google makes everything you search an AI search.

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      whoa nice! Thanks!

      For people trying to configure that in mozilla (I am trying to get away from it but for now :/)

      • -> Edit -> Settings -> Search
      • “Search Shortcuts” -> Add (to add a search engine)
      • “Search Engine Name”: DuckDuckGo Lite
      • “URL with %s in place of search term”: https://lite.duckduckgo.com/lite/?q=%25s (this has to be =%s, lemmy keeps mutilating that to =%25s everytime I save my post)
      • “Keyword (optional)”: @ddgl (or pick whatever you like - it appears @ddg is hardcoded and gets refused)
      • -> Save Engine
      • scroll up to the top, “Default Search Engine”
      • from the dropdown list, select “DuckGuckGo Lite”

      Done.

        • Honytawk@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          To have an opinion on how it feels to murder: yes

          To understand the repercussions on society: no, because you are part of that society

        • Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m talking about using a piece of software, no idea how you arrived to murder from that. People on this platform also have many opinions on TikTok without ever trying it. Feels like they are talking out of their ass whenever they mention it.

          • Squirrelanna@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It is an example of something you do not need to experience first hand to have a valid opinion on. Outsider perspectives are valuable too.

      • yonderbarn@lazysoci.al
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I care about privacy and with chatgpt I understand that (at least at one point) you need to create an account, which means each time you use it it is building a database on you. I’ve also seen in interviews with Altman that even he acknowledges the privacy risks of chatgpt.

        What’s ignorant about my opinion there?

      • MrSmith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        …a piece of software that has encouraged suicide, and is proven to create psychosis?

        Yeah, it’s just software. My dudes.

  • Affidavit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I wonder what percentage of Lemmy users are absolutely sick of seeing variations of the exact same thing, over, and over, and over, and fucking over again.

  • setsubyou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    2 months ago

    The article already notes that

    privacy-focused users who don’t want “AI” in their search are more likely to use DuckDuckGo

    But the opposite is also true. Maybe it’s not 90% to 10% elsewhere, but I’d expect the same general imbalance because some people who would answer yes to ai in a survey on a search web site don’t go to search web sites in the first place. They go to ChatGPT or whatever.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, this is why polling is hard.

      Online polls are much more likely to be answered by people who like to answer polls than people who don’t. People who use Duck Duck Go are much more likely to be privacy-focused, knowledgeable enough to use a different search engine other than the default, etc.

      This is also an echo chamber (The Fediverse) discussing the results of a poll on another similar echo chamber (Duck Duck Go). You won’t find nearly as many people on Lemmy or Mastodon who love AI as you will in most of the world. Still, I do get the impression that it’s a lot less popular than the AI companies want us to think.