The first result [0] pretty much immediately drops into what commands to run. If that result is part of the problem, I fully disagree it is a problem.
[0]: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-...
My go-to example for this is when I once searched for egg substitutes for a baking recipe. Lots of multi-paragraph results about how eggs are nutritious, why eggs are useful in baking, why you might want to substitute them out. Finally after many more paragraphs of non-answers and many ignored ads: my answer, but not in a brief list, a paragraph for each one further explaining what they are.
I go to an LLM for these sorts of questions now and ask it to be brief. The internet for basic questions of any sort lead to these same frustrating webpages otherwise.
A secondary contributing cause is that many people aren't very good at structuring explanations. For example, the old rule of thumb that you usually won't miss anything important if you skip the first third of most YouTube how-to videos existed before the algorithm disfavored very short videos (and post-TikTok that's all changed too).
> You *Google* “how to fix a Git conflict”, and every result ... is ... *"SEO-stuffed* filler drowning ... the answer.
Mate, you've searched something using Google, and the results you're looking at have been optimized to appear at the top of Google search results. So why are you surprised by this?
Your quibble, if it's with anyone, is with Google and why they value this kind of content (why filling the page with valueless drivel makes it more likely to appear in search results).
$ apropos 'merge conflict'
git-mergetool (1) - Run merge conflict resolution tools to resolve merge conflictsThat’s just… I don’t know what to feel about that. I’d rather keep the websites we visit for humans first, LLMs second. Not the other way around.
mtVessel•3mo ago
quuxplusone•3mo ago
Bonus: only one place to update when you realize you have explained it wrong.
anon7000•3mo ago