The Zero Click Internet

Cute, but no The systems available now let people create their own localhost and host their own web pages and interfaces without a domain name
Google cloud, and a lot of other cloud services are free
Most people will use advanced versions of Cursor AI and Pythagora AI to write code by talking to it
It is looking to be advanced enough to create a whole app and webbased interface for home computers in the next 6 months
After that, everyone will have their own sites forever
Sorry to disappoint you, but facts are facts!

Most people, no. Only those with a technical understanding who are willing to pull back the covers will accomplish AI to create the code for their web based interface. I see that as extension of todays web designers, content creators and programmers; a service offering for users.

I myself does not trust any of the big players you mentioned and avoid Google/Meta at all costs. Use DuckDuckGo for search with a Firefox browser. I use Windows less and less usually long enough to start a Linux VM via VMware Workstation with a VPN running.

When I research new information, such as Zero Click, I read multiple sources ( Wikipedia is tainted information ). Zero Click, not for me. Google, Meta, Microsoft, et al needs to broken apart.
 
I don't get it. I have no problem is most of this, but will side step the chatbot portion.
Just type the URL you want to go to in the address bar.

If everyone just wants to block each other off and repost the same content on every platform, fine by me... They'd be waving goodbye to that sweet affiliate and referral money though. I don't think they've got the stomach for it. Love always finds a way.
 
My biggest concern is just the fundamental dilution of knowledge and authenticity of information. I think it is great that things like ChatGPT can effectively summarize and communicate vast amounts of knowledge from the internet into a simple to understand conversation, but at least when I use it I know that it is fallible and need to check its authenticity of information.
It gets even worse considering how confident, foolish people are in general. "What do you mean I am wrong, I got the answer from the best AI app." Same stupid people being wrong, but much more confident about knowing it.
 
LLMs do not generate knowledge, they simply present the knowledge in a better way. And that knowledge comes from internet links. And it is good practice for LLM providers to include the links that the generated answers used. I believe most of them do.
So it's not really that different. It's like search on steroids.

And search on LSD. Because about 50% of the times I've used ChatGTP it guesstimated technical specs, being totally off.
 
There’s a push to kill small businesses with regulations and clearly the same goes for the internet. The future seems to hold only few mega corps, like in movies
 
This is disturbing, giving Google too much power, which they surely will abuse.
Is this a comment from 2010? :)

The article is spot on, and to some extent it has already happened. People will do anything for the sake of "convenience". And the worst thing is that those who should know better - nerds, geeks, creators, etc - will cheer it on and join in just so they can get some of the scraps the Big Ones will throw them.
 
Many independent tech sites have closed or were sold because the internet and user behavior changed. Gone are the pages long articles digging into chip architecture or process fabrication. We are left with youtube showmen and gaming benchmarks. The attention span has dropped significantly. Even video consumption has migrated to short videos. So, summarization is the next step in the evolution, or involution, of the internet.
 
I find this article hysterical. A classic case of your food eating you. Just to understand - AI and google monopolization of information is based upon the trawling of the web and websites. This trawling allows them to homogenize, pre-chew, and feed you information like a mama bird its young. Now this leads to the eventual destruction of the same information that created this ability, leading to a dearth of new content, leading to..... starvation. Problem solved. Or they just invent the next batch of data by pulling it out of their unmentionables. I see a big dilemma coming for them.
 
I'm calling BS. I believe in the attempt, but I think the hinderence this will have on society will make significant push back inevitable. Mostly because the Ad filled vision they have for us is so terrible that people won't put up with it.

Microsoft is pushing people towards Linux, Google is pushing users towards Firefox.

See, the issue is that government officials don't care until something impacts them. If Microsoft keeps spying on user's and businesses, it's going to work it's way up to the government level when they say "we can't have this crap around"

Yeah, this article ignores many facts, but even one simple one suffices to discredit it. People still need to find what they were looking for, and the information still has to be produced and stored and served from somewhere, and I am likely wanting to browse more of the same.

Sure I can google for a microwave, and google can show me what amazon has... but amazon still needs to be there on the other end to ship me the microwave... and gee, I am not just going to pick from the three options google highlighted, I'm gunna shop around... where? Oh, on amazon... why would I do endless google searches when I can just click around amazon.

Or information? Sure if I actually googled for an article about the RTX480 and google fed me some decent options prior to the search results I might read them... but TechSpot and Tomshardware still had to produce them... and more likely, I trust TechSpot or Toms Hardware so if I want news on video cards I'll just go there and look at all of TechSpot's content... same as always.

Remember the death of newspapers... 30 years ago?

The clickable internet isn't going anywhere in 2 years.
 
With the wide variety of perspectives, comments, and backgrounds shared here, it makes me realize that the web is very different for each person, depending on what you do regularly and how you access and browse information online.

That being said, I wanted to contribute to the discussion by emphasizing that Josh's point is not only valid but entirely real. The timing might be debatable, but I can confirm that, as an online publisher, TechSpot (along with many others) has been feeling the squeeze from all sides over the past few years: diminishing search engine traffic, reduced ad revenue, AI absorbing information without compensation, AI-generated answers replacing original sources, and more.

Now, the column goes beyond to argue that there will be a domino effect, once Google and other big tech players essentially kill the website. The consequences will ripple across various industries, and the way we find information online will shift dramatically—likely for the first time since the Web 2.0 transition in the early 2000s.
 
Interesting read . I used to use the search engine vastly more than I do now . Now I tend to just visit the same sites . I am sure search engines used to be a lot more useful and better all round .
 
Really don't think that is going to work. Many sites make money from ads to stay in business. If only their info is shown, they are losing money.
 
This is a crappy idea that will further decimate free speech. It will direct all content through a few giant corporations who will curate it to fit the establishment narrative. They already do that with TV to the point that virtually every station is spewing the same BS news, even using exactly the same verbiage. Of course it's for your, ahem... convenience. It saves you from hearing differing points of view and having to decide which you believe to be true. No thinking necessary. If they want your opinion, they'll give it to you.
 
Will this come to pass? Sure, but will it be the entire internet user base? No, I seriously doubt it.

Usenet, BBs, FTPs all still exist. And websites will continue as well. IMHO we will have both a clickless internet for users that prefer a highly curated experience, and a return to a simplified link based internet for those that don't.
Hopefully the link based one will see a massive decrease in enshitification, and we'll see a return to sites that are more about providing a platform than leveraging their user base for profits. So it might mean a return to one man operations, being run more for the enjoyment than profit. But I simply can't see platforms like Techspot totally disappearing.
 
Interesting points, especially

Instead you'll spend all your time on a small handful of platforms and apps like Google or TikTok and never leave them. The impact this will have, not just on your experience but on the world, will be massive.

It means an end to digital publishers. The small ones at first. Most of those will be out of business by the end of this year. Then the medium ones will vanish, most likely they will all be gone by spring. Eventually, most of the big publishers will go under. Those that survive will do so by signing contracts with platforms like Google or OpenAI (ChatGPT) to create content specifically for them to scrape.

This reminds me of that article about a college professor discovering that most of his students could not understand the concept of files and folders in computers.
 
"stopped promoting" translation: they hide/de-rank your comments/posts, if they have links in it.
 
"stopped promoting" translation: they hide/de-rank your comments/posts, if they have links in it.
This is going to cause serious problems for people who follow niche subjects. I run a fb page for a small group and am now having to put links into the comments as fb will not let me actively link to off-site articles of interest. I'm not sure how long I will be able to keep doing this, but having just tried a couple of AI sites, I know that AI will not provide the accurate information I find on an ever dwindling internet, as more and more website hide behind paywalls.
 
People will just abandon Google and Microsoft search for information and turn to aggregators like DDG who take their search pool from many sources and don't AI and ad fill the hell out of every result.

Don't panic.
 
With the wide variety of perspectives, comments, and backgrounds shared here, it makes me realize that the web is very different for each person, depending on what you do regularly and how you access and browse information online.

That being said, I wanted to contribute to the discussion by emphasizing that Josh's point is not only valid but entirely real. The timing might be debatable, but I can confirm that, as an online publisher, TechSpot (along with many others) has been feeling the squeeze from all sides over the past few years: diminishing search engine traffic, reduced ad revenue, AI absorbing information without compensation, AI-generated answers replacing original sources, and more.

Now, the column goes beyond to argue that there will be a domino effect, once Google and other big tech players essentially kill the website. The consequences will ripple across various industries, and the way we find information online will shift dramatically—likely for the first time since the Web 2.0 transition in the early 2000s.
Read this a few days ago and wanted to respond, but thought to myself: "They're not going to react well to what I'd like to say.." So I'll change direction slightly and offer the following;
Julio, TechSpot is not going to go away for any reason other than poor management choices.

There are other tech sites out there which are not only surviving but thriving. Most of them are doing so without selling out.

You have the ability to adapt to the changes in the world but also the ability to see the writing on the wall. Ironically, AI put that writing on the wall. Robin Li made some good points. The AI bubble is going to pop. How, when and to what effect are the only questions. If TechSpot can adapt, in the correct ways, it will survive and thrive. This requires delivered thought and a commitment to wise and PROPER methodologies. This requires you to work smarter not harder. It requires that you avoid narrow thinking and limiting yourselves artificially. It requires that you step outside your particular bubble and see the world around you in a greater scope.

Choose well and you succeed. Choose poorly and you will run TechSpot into the ground nose first. The choice is entirely yours.
 
Last edited:
I'm a new poster here, but this deserves some clarification and perspective. And just to qualify, I have been with the web since its inception when kids were making millions doing basic HTML.

It will take a whole lot longer than a single year to make those kinds of intrinsic changes to how the web functions and undo its basic functionality, this piece is hyperbolic, to say the least, and trust me: the companies in question have a very vested interest in staying in business, and they have the money to hire lawyers; we do not live in a totalitarian state like China where this can all be done in the dark of night with the sweep of a simple whim, so calm down, people. We have courts, and anyone that wants to abolish them can hopefully see their value in a situation like this: we are not allowed, legally, due to our separation of powers, to institute anything like this at the drop of a hat. Not now, not ever. So, preserve those powers.

That said, this is definitely a good peek to what the people in question would *like* to do, very much, and we had all better pay attention, and they are very much taking steps each day to make it a reality. It was very stupid to grant Silicon Valley immunity at the dawn of the web era, but here we are. It could very well shake out like the 'unicorn' era of Silicon Valley where the big bucks were flowing in the beginning but because it was unsustainable, and frankly, stupid, the wells dried up. As many others have shared, what we term 'AI' is largely, to oversimplify, just glorified search, and it is no wonder at all that creeps like Google are at the forefront. That company has done *nothing but* evil since the days they brought Schmidt on board, which may predate some of the readers and even writers on this site.

Don't give up just yet, but DO take the past 15 years or so as an object lesson, because a cycle is very much repeating currently. Let the backlash be bigger than the threat. I know revenues are down for everyone, but we still have choices in this country. Let's keep it that way, okay? We, currently at least, still have that power.

And PS - this is what the whole 'net neutrality' boondoggle was about. Silicon Valley was preserving their own control, not looking out for the benefit of a user. We have clearly seen what the giants in the industry want to do with their power. It isn't good for anyone, and ultimately it will cease to be cash cow for them, at least through the lens of ethics.
 
Seems like North Korea is the testing grounds for the future of internet, where you will be able to open only few goverment sponsored websites, or no websites at all.
 
This is one way of looking at it - one viewpoint. But I see no justification of the viewpoint presented. The means of accessing information will change, as it has done through the ages of humans; however the information providers (often called content providers in for example the entertainment business) will still be king: those that produce content valuable to the many will survive those that do not will not. If the technical means of providing content (Google search or website or ebook or .......) does not surface or provide valuable content then it will die - one click or not. Advertising or not.
 
Back