We asked AI why search engine results have declined, and here the reasons, according to AI.

1. Increase in misinformation and fake news: With the rise of social media and user-generated content, it has become easier for false or misleading information to spread online. This can make it more difficult to find accurate and reliable information in search engine results.
2. Changes in search algorithms: Search engines constantly update their algorithms to improve the relevance and quality of search results. However, these changes can sometimes have unintended consequences, such as favoring certain types of content over others or reducing the visibility of smaller websites.
3. Overreliance on ads: Many search engines rely heavily on advertising revenue, which can lead to a proliferation of ads and a decrease in the visibility of organic search results. This can make it harder to find relevant information and can create a sense of frustration for users.
4. Increasing complexity of queries: As the amount of information online continues to grow, users may be searching for increasingly complex or specific queries. This can make it more difficult for search engines to provide relevant results, as the algorithms may struggle to understand the nuances of the query.

Since all content is generated by people (or used to be) we asked for the opposite of user-created content.

The opposite of user-generated content would be content that is not created by users, but rather by a centralized entity or authority. This type of content is often referred to as “professionally generated content” or “publisher-generated content”. Examples of professionally generated content include articles from newspapers, books from publishers, videos from production companies, and music from record labels. This type of content is typically created and distributed by organizations or individuals who have the resources and expertise to produce high-quality content on a consistent basis. Unlike user-generated content, which is created and contributed by a wide range of individuals with varying levels of skill and expertise, professionally generated content is typically created by a smaller group of individuals or organizations with a specific focus or expertise.

– chatgpt

This in turn led us to many questions related to a centralized entity or authority which we know has been used through out the history of mankind to suppress thoughts other than those crafted by the clergy, the royal court or King himself. Galileo quickly comes to mind, or the evil eugenics movement of the early 20th century. This led us to ask about the extinction of dinosaurs. Prior to the 1980’s, we were told that climate change was probably the largest factor in the extinction of dinosaurs. ChatGpt was quite glib.

Twitter and Facebook would have banned the Alvarez’s

The theory that a bolide impact contributed greatly to the extinction of most dinosaurs and many other species was first proposed in 1980 by a team of researchers led by Luis Alvarez, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, and his son Walter Alvarez, a geologist. They discovered a layer of iridium, an element that is rare on Earth but common in asteroids and comets, in rocks from the end of the Cretaceous period, which coincided with the mass extinction of the dinosaurs.

The Alvarez hypothesis was initially controversial and faced skepticism from some members of the scientific community. However, subsequent research over the next few decades provided additional evidence to support the idea that a bolide impact played a major role in the extinction event. In 1991, for example, researchers discovered a large impact crater in Chicxulub, Mexico, that was dated to the same time period as the extinction. The crater, which measures approximately 180 kilometers in diameter, is believed to have been caused by a bolide impact.

Today, the theory that a bolide impact contributed greatly to the extinction of most dinosaurs and many other species is widely accepted by the scientific community. However, there is ongoing debate about the exact extent of the impact, as well as the role that other factors such as volcanic activity and climate change may have played in the extinction event.

– ChatGpt

Just to be clear, Luis and his son Walter were called a lot of names by the scientific community. But not all, the 1980’s were not as woke as today. And Luis and Walter were on to something, they were right, and Richard Nixon was wrong. And AI still has to mention climate change, or get yelled at.

And here lies the rub. People used to use the search engine to get to the bottom of things, often controversial and with varied opinions. The new search paradigm is that you only get the side of the story that is blessed by Elizabeth Holmes. If the search engine was so tuned, when you questioned whether a single drop of blood was a sufficient sample size to perform dozens of complex blood tests, the tuning of the search engine would rank highest the results with high ongoing expertise ratings, and since CBS News, ABC News and CNBC all reported that Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes were AWESOME, that this was possible, the search engine tuning would be preserving mis-information rather that fighting it. Sources questioning Theranos, Eugenics or even Adolph Hitler before 1936 would be labelled by current search engine tuning models as mis-information or dis-information