In a recent DuckDuckGo poll, nine out of tenresponders said they don't want "AI" features.
    • Retro_unlimited@lemmy.worldEnglish
      31·
      56 minutes ago

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

    • coffee_nutcase207@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      40 minutes 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.worldEnglish
      6·
      41 minutes 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.

    • Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      712·
      5 hours ago

      Not trying to promote the use of AI here, but being proud of not using something and having any opinion on it at the same time is very follow the herd in ignorance vibe.

  • Affidavit@lemmy.worldEnglish
    41·
    6 hours 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.worldEnglish
    82·
    9 hours 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.

  • Deestan@lemmy.worldEnglish
    49·
    6 hours ago

    Meanwhile, at HQ: “The userbase hallucinated that they don’t want AI. Maybe we prompted them wrong?”

    • Sockenklaus@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      148·
      4 hours ago

      The prompt was bad: there was no option to vote for “a little bit of AI as a tool is not bad but don’t force feed it to me”.

      I think there were many people who voted for “no AI” who would’ve voted for “a little bit of ai” if they had the option.

      • eksb@programming.devEnglish
        12·
        4 hours ago

        There were probably also people who voted for “yes AI” who would have voted for “a little bit of ai when I explicitly ask for it” if they had the option.

  • WanderingThoughts@europe.pubEnglish
    16·
    9 hours ago

    That’s when the Silicon Valley types all bring out the ol’ “People don’t know what they want until you show it to them.” Well, they already showed what LLM can do and it’s not that great.

  • radio@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    36·
    7 hours ago

    And how much of their budget are they blowing on AI features despite polls showing their regular users don’t even want it? Probably also 90%.

    • M137@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 hours ago

      Because the poll just ended… it’s been opt out since before the poll and nothing has changed, yet (if anything does change). How is this not obvious?