this post was submitted on 18 May 2025
212 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

70259 readers
3650 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In an era defined by polarized views on everything from public health to politics, a new Tulane University study offers insight into why people may struggle to change their minds—especially when they turn to the internet for answers.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cecilkorik@lemmy.ca 30 points 4 days ago (5 children)

I believe it, but I'm still debating whether something like Kagi is worth paying for. On principle, I strongly feel like it is, but in practice I'm still evaluating. So far, I've played with it a few times and I haven't observed any notable improvements, but I'm trying to keep an open mind. First impression is that it's definitely a little quicker and cleaner to get at the information I'm looking for. And taking a step back, I have to say it's impressive that they can replicate a behemoth like Google's accuracy already. On the other hand, I've felt like Google has gotten so crappy at search recently that maybe I'm simply not going to be satisfied with anyone simply "meeting" them and maybe what I want simply isn't possible, in which case I'm just paying for disappointment.

[–] subtex@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I made the switch to Kagi January last year.

I know it's all just personal experience and everyone can have their own needs, but I was skeptical at first as well.

Almost a year and a half later I've got no complaints.

My searches feel like how Google felt years ago: mainly I never think about it. I search, find what I want and I'm off. It just works as I'd expect without the nonsense ads and AI Google has now.

Worth a free trial. See how it works for you.

[–] Snickeboa@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I switched 3 months ago and have the same experience as you. Got on the $25 tier that has access to all AI assistants/GPT models through their “Kagi Assistant”. So I basically swapped my ChatGPT subscription for the Kagi one which also has the search.

What’s nice is that I can maniacally search for stuff I’m looking into without them being bombarded by ads for it for a month after. Feels refreshing!

Would recommend.

[–] nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

How would kagi help in the bias described in the article? If a person makes a biased search, any search engine will behave the same. The text mentions that even unbiased search engines are susceptible to this.

I'm a fan of FOSS like everyone else on Lemmy, but I don't think it's a universal solution for everything. Some things are worth paying for and I value an efficient search experience and privacy (Kagi has no personal info on me. I pay with a crypto wallet through a third party) so Kagi is a worthwhile service for me.

I agree with you though, any good search should be good enough to dig up the opinions and bias that is out there somewhere that agrees with your own biases.

[–] confuser@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 days ago

Here's hope to ladybird, it seems like a recipe for good things but its still like a year out if I recall for a beta release or something

[–] baduhai@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

I was in the same boat as you, except that I came to the conclusion it was worth paying for. Then perplexity came out, and that decision was a little harder to justify, but I stuck with kagi.

Then my ISP gave me a year of perplexity pro along with my internet speed upgrade. As much as I hate AI tools being everywhere, some of them are good, and Perplexity pro is one of them. Now that I've tried it, I think it's worth it to the point that I'd pay for it even if my ISP didn't give me the subscription.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days ago

Same here. Been looking at options like Kagi.

I decided years ago that since everyone wanted my info, I might as well just pick one instead of spreading it around everywhere. So I'm heavily invested in the Google ecosystem across the board.

[–] raltoid@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Yeah, the way search engines have implemented LLMs have made it much worse.

You can go on google or duckduckgo and search for one thing, click the top link and click back after a few seconds. And the order of results has changed. So the second link you thought might have been correct(and was), is now 5-6 or lower. And the new second link is even worse than the first and usually generative content catered to the first link you clicked(wrongly).

[–] vimmiewimmie@lemm.ee 11 points 3 days ago

Researchers found that people often use search engines in ways that unintentionally reinforce their existing beliefs. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that even unbiased search engines can lead users into digital echo chambers—simply because of how people phrase their search queries.

"When people look up information online—whether on Google, ChatGPT or new AI-powered search engines—they often pick search terms that reflect what they already believe (sometimes without even realizing it),” said lead author Eugina Leung, an assistant professor at Tulane’s A. B. Freeman School of Business. “Because today’s search algorithms are designed to give you ‘the most relevant’ answers for whatever term you type, those answers can then reinforce what you thought in the first place. This makes it harder for people to discover broader perspectives.”

For example, people who believe caffeine is healthy might search “benefits of caffeine,” while skeptics might type “caffeine health risks.” Those subtle differences steered them toward drastically different search results, ultimately reinforcing their original beliefs.

The effect persisted even when participants had no intention of confirming a bias. In a few studies, fewer than 10% admitted to deliberately crafting their search to validate what they already thought, yet their search behavior still aligned closely with their beliefs.

The researchers tested several ways to encourage users to broaden their views. Simply prompting users to consider alternative perspectives or perform more searches had little effect. However, one approach worked consistently: changing the algorithm.

When search tools were programmed to return a broader range of results—regardless of how narrow the query was—people were more likely to reconsider their beliefs. In one experiment, participants who saw a balanced set of articles about caffeine health effects walked away with more moderate views and were more open to changing their behavior.

Users rated the broader results equally useful and relevant as the narrowly tailored ones. The findings suggest that search platforms could be crucial in combating polarization—if designed to do so. The researchers even found that most people were interested in using a “Search Broadly” feature—a button (conceptualized as doing the opposite of Google’s current “I’m feeling Lucky” button) that would intentionally deliver diverse perspectives on a topic.

[–] Spaniard@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Ever since I read about the "online bubble" of google I decided to step out of that. I am in the internet to enrich myself, I need to hear opinions that are different from mine to grow up.

That was a long time ago, among other things what I did was browse without login in, remove cookies after closing the browser and use several search engines not just one.

Now I selfhost a searxng instance.

[–] SilentKnightOwl@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago

Same on all counts.

[–] zapzap@lemmings.world 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Don't tell me caffeine has drawbacks. Don't wanna hear it!

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Don't worry, new research shows all the negatives are made up by big water. You may continue consuming as many cans as you want. Drink verification can to confirm.

[–] zapzap@lemmings.world 1 points 4 days ago

This feels truthy to me.

[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Veritasium (youtube) did a piece on this, can't remember which video it was, might've been the one on his thesis of how to teach STEM topics in videos

[–] tyler@programming.dev 4 points 3 days ago

Veritasium, the dude that made up science experiments to prove his sponsors are worth buying from.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I haven’t used Google products or services in a decade!

..but I know everyone I know has…

[–] ssladam@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If you've visited almost any website then Google ads are tracking you. Unless you're a masochist running full lockout, noscript, and eliminate the use of cookies.... Google is following you.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 days ago

Okay. Shit beyond my control has nothing to do with me not using Google products or services.

[–] Scolding7300@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

I wish they'd offer a way to mitigate bias in the summary article since we can't see if in the actual study requires access to see if the researchers did