• Otter
    link
    fedilink
    English
    417 months ago

    It could also be A/B testing, so not everyone will have the AI running in general

      • Otter
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Wouldn’t they be? They could measure how likely it is that someone clicks on the generated link/text

        • @credo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -17
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either.

          • @IllNess@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            317 months ago

            What this would measure is how long you would stay on the page without scrolling. Less scrolling means more time looking at ads.

            This is the influence of Prabhakar Raghavan.

          • @RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            27 months ago

            Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate.

            Given the choice between clicks/engagement and accuracy, is pretty clear Google’s for the former is what got us into this hell hole.

            • @sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              17 months ago

              Yup, if you have to repeat your search 3 times, you’re seeing 3x the ads. If you control most of the market, where are your customers going to go? Most will just deal with it and search more.

      • @halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        247 months ago

        Google runs passive A/B testing all the time.

        If you’re using a Google service there’s a 99% chance you’re part of some sort of internal test of changes.