Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

zutnoq t1_j9bhoq8 wrote

Search providers like google don't just show you links though. They also show you potentially relevant excerpts so you often don't even need to go to the linked site to get what you were after, and show previews of images in image search etc.

Determining exactly where to draw the line of what to consider fair-use for things like this is a highly complex and dynamic issue. Web search engines are (by necessity) parasitic as well but that alone neither makes them bad nor illegal.

Parasitic is also not the "bad" counterpart of symbiotic. A symbiotic relationship is simply a parasitic relationship that benefits both parties. Just saying parasitic says nothing about which side(s) would benefit. I think exploitative would be a more appropriate word to use for such relationships.

3

ImSuperHelpful t1_j9bqacf wrote

Those relevant excerpts and similar features have been pretty detrimental to search click through rates in certain areas (they’re known as “no click” searches in the industry)… but the alternative is to block google bots entirely, which isn’t viable if you’re operating a content site since google has an effective monopoly on search. Also, those features do still link out to the content they’re showing on the SERP, whereas the chat ai doesn’t and gives the appearance that it’s the source of the information.

Your point about vocabulary is fair

2