← Back to context

Comment by thelastgallon

9 hours ago

This reminds me of Walmarts squeezing strategy with all the manufacturers. Business with us at the price we say or out of business.

11 comments

thelastgallon

Reply
johnny_canuck  4 hours ago

But ultimately that strategy is good for the consumer right?

In this context, if Google is going to give me the recipe without having to scroll through the story, that seems like a win to me.

The ad-revenue driven Internet of web 2.0 is finally dead and I'm not sure I'm all that sad.

  • redsparrow  4 hours ago

    Without some way to generate revenue, people aren't going to publish recipes (for Google to scrape into their AI.) Maybe we could live without more recipes being fed into the machine, but there are many other types of content that will suffer the same fate.

    It would be nice to find something better than an ad-revenue driven web, but I'm not sure this is it. We'll find out I guess...

    • bbondo  3 hours ago

      > people aren't going to publish recipes

      Sure they are. I can attest that musicians will gladly publish their music even when no recompense is offered. Surely culinary artists are the same.

      1 reply →

  • goosejuice  22 minutes ago

    You can find many ad free recipes in the cookbooks at your local library. They're likely of higher quality as well.

  • mcphage  2 hours ago

    > But ultimately that strategy is good for the consumer right?

    No. Temporarily it’s good for the consumer. Ultimately it is bad for the consumer, because as prices drop, so to does quality.

    • itsmek  1 hour ago

      It's not uncommon for free things to be higher quality than cheap things, especially when we're not talking about physical goods. Think hobbyist vs hack. Selective pro bono vs quantity over quality. The former describes old internet while the latter describes much ad-supported internet. I'm not saying cheap is better than expensive, and I'm not saying everything works this way, but I do think many things do, especially for pure information that doesn't have a major capital cost associated.

  • Ar-Curunir  3 hours ago

    No, because now Google controls entirely what you see. They could decide to show you the recipe after all.

    Also, at some point even the ad-laden websites will die, and then Googles sources will be extinguished.