Google search results suck now…

7

October

2025

5/5 (1)

Hey fellow students,

Today I want to talk about my experience with Google search results, particularly the new AI-generated summaries that appear at the top. Google has been gradually rolling out this update over the past year and introduced it in the Netherlands last May [1].

When I first saw the AI search overview, my immediate thought was: “What is this, and how do I disable it?” The first question was easy to answer, since most of us are already familiar with AI chat tools such as ChatGPT and Gemini. The second question, however, still has no answer. As far as I know, there is currently no way to turn it off. This means I had no choice but to use it. After several months of using Google as my main search engine, here are my thoughts.

Less browsing

Before the AI overview appeared in search results, searching usually worked like this: you entered a term, got a list of links, and clicked the ones that looked most relevant until you found what you needed. In the past few months, I have noticed that this process happens less often. For simple questions, the AI overview usually provides a correct answer right away. Because it appears above all other results, it is the first thing people read, which means fewer clicks on the regular links below. Many websites have reported lower traffic because of this change, and some have even been forced to shut down due to the decline [2].

Wrong answers

For short and simple questions, the AI overview generally gives good answers. However, knowing that using it reduces website traffic and potentially harms smaller sites raises an important question: is it worth it?

Some might think that those small sites at the bottom of the results are not that important anymore. Yet, those very sites provide much of the data that tools like the AI overview rely on for training. For now, the issue mostly appears with simple searches, but when the question becomes more complex, the AI often gets things wrong. According to the AI overview itself, it answers questions incorrectly 60% of the time. Google later claimed that this number was inaccurate [3].

My final thoughts

Since Google does not allow users to disable the AI overview, I decided to try DuckDuckGo, a search engine where you can turn it off. Unfortunately, I found it less effective than Google, so I eventually switched back. These days, I still use Google but try to avoid relying on the AI overview as much as possible. It simply feels better knowing that I am viewing real search results and not unintentionally hurting the websites that make the web what it is. Google should give users the choice to disable the AI overview or make it more useful instead. For example, it could show a short summary of what each link contains instead of trying to replacing the links entirely. But for now I will keep avoiding it, let me know what you think in the comments.

References:
[1]: https://tweakers.net/nieuws/234832/google-brengt-ai-overzichten-boven-zoekresultaten-uit-in-nederland.html
[2]: https://mashable.com/article/google-ai-overviews-impacting-link-clicks-pew-study

[3]: https://mashable.com/article/google-ai-overviews-2025-review

Please rate this

The AI Standoff: Are We Losing the Human in Hiring?

17

September

2025

5/5 (1)

The job application process has become a peculiar digital dance. On one side, applicants use AI to craft perfectly tailored resumes and cover letters, optimized with keywords to navigate automated screening systems (Milmo & Almeida, 2025). On the other, companies employ their own AI to sift through this deluge of applications, searching for those very same keywords (Goergen et al., 2025). This AI-versus-AI scenario begs the question: in this race for robotic perfection, what’s the point?

This technological arms race in recruitment is rapidly changing the hiring landscape. For job seekers, AI tools can level the playing field, helping them articulate their skills more effectively and navigate the complex world of Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) (Milmo & Almeida, 2025). Companies, in turn, leverage AI to manage the sheer volume of applications and increase efficiency, reducing the time it takes to hire (Goergen et al., 2025).

However, this automation on both sides creates a potential crisis of authenticity. When a candidate’s application is AI-generated and a company’s initial screening is AI-conducted, the process risks becoming a sterile transaction devoid of human connection. Recruiters report receiving applications that are polished yet impersonal, lacking the individual voice that reveals a candidate’s true personality and potential cultural fit (Sandle, 2025).

This isn’t to say that AI has no place in hiring. The benefits of increased efficiency and the potential to reduce unconscious bias are significant (Goergen et al., 2025). AI can handle the repetitive, administrative tasks, freeing up human recruiters to focus on what they do best: building relationships and engaging with candidates on a deeper level.

The ultimate goal of recruitment is to find the right person for the right role, a task that requires understanding nuances that algorithms may miss. While AI can be a powerful assistant, it should not be the sole decision-maker. The future of effective hiring lies in a hybrid approach, where technology augments human intuition and insight.

So, as we navigate this new era of AI-driven recruitment, let’s not lose sight of the human element. For applicants, AI should be a tool to enhance, not replace, their unique voice. For companies, AI should be a means to identify talent, not a barrier to genuine connection. After all, a successful hire is about more than matching keywords on a screen; it’s about finding a person who will thrive within a team and contribute to a shared vision. In the end, the most meaningful connections are still made between people, not algorithms.

References:

Goergen, J., De Bellis, E., & Klesse, A. (2025, 14 juli). How AI Assessment Tools Affect Job Candidates’ Behavior. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2025/07/how-ai-assessment-tools-affect-job-candidates-behavior

Milmo, D., & Almeida, L. (2025, 16 juli). Teach First job applicants will get in-person interviews after more apply using AI. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/13/graduates-teach-first-in-person-interviews-ai

Sandle, T. (2025, 30 augustus). The rise of AI job applications: What UK employers need to watch for. Digital Journal. https://www.digitaljournal.com/business/the-rise-of-ai-job-applications-what-uk-employers-need-to-watch-for/article

Please rate this