YHK - yet another hacker news clone

Schools that block Google’s A.I. will lose student access to its search engine

133 points ceejayoz 1 hour ago 100 comments

https://archive.ph/RuwsB

https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/products/educatio...

dwedge 1 hour ago | parent

[flagged]

randomNumber7 1 hour ago | parent

Get "uBlock origin" bro and ads go away. Also you can click the archive link that op posted and read it there without paywall.

buellerbueller 13 minutes ago | parent

You could just log in. Seems like you are your own problem.

MetalBreaksAndB 1 hour ago | parent

I wonder if schools will manage to filter this. Probably on windows , but I'm less sure on chromebooks.

xhkkffbf 1 hour ago | parent

The students can just log in with a generic Gmail account using a incognito tab.

ceejayoz 57 minutes ago | parent

That's often blocked on school-provided devices.

jlev1 1 hour ago | parent

> If a school has banned A.I., he [Chris Phillips, vice president for education at Google] added, students “will not have access to search, and they’ll see a message from their school that indicates it’s not available.”

So scummy! Make it sound like the school's decision, rather than Google's.

bluefirebrand 1 hour ago | parent

Sad to see Google's playbook become "be as evil as possible"

I know they removed "don't be evil" a while ago now, but they didn't have to immediately become the exact opposite

Catloafdev 1 hour ago | parent

They've come a long way from 'don't be evil'

krunck 1 hour ago | parent

"Don't" isn't all that far, it's just one word.

gdulli 40 minutes ago | parent

I guess it was effectively phrased in the second person.

elmcrest 1 hour ago | parent

so what? there are alternatives... and who still googles nowadays anyways :)

demo4567 1 hour ago | parent

good riddance. it is useless anyways

djoldman 1 hour ago | parent

As usual, the truth is a little less clickbaity. It's just opt-in:

https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/products/educatio...

> We believe schools should have control over AI in their classrooms and in providing administrators with controls to help them manage their approach. After listening to schools, teachers, leading researchers, and policymakers, we are now updating our approach to controls for Gemini, Gemini Notebook, Gemini in Classroom, and Google Search. Access to these products will be entirely off for K-12 student accounts until school administrators explicitly turn them on.

ceejayoz 1 hour ago | parent

> A.I. features are now a standard part of Google’s commercially available search engine. “Search and A.I. are deeply integrated,” said Chris Phillips, vice president for education at Google. If a school has banned A.I., he added, students “will not have access to search, and they’ll see a message from their school that indicates it’s not available.”

C'mon, it's right in the article.

The school can control AI on/off. Off means no search too.

skeledrew 27 minutes ago | parent

Well their search engine is explicitly AI-driven; no AI, no search. Like you can't have juice that doesn't contain water.

ceejayoz 25 minutes ago | parent

> Like you can't have juice that doesn't contain water.

This particular bit of juice didn't have the "AI summaries" ingredient for 93% of its existence.

Schools invested enormously in Google Classroom and Google for Education, and now the deal's changing. Not for the benefit of students.

shostack 1 hour ago | parent

Does Google tie Gemini access for schools to their ability to train on the data and use it for ads and measurement like they have done to Android if you want to do anything halfway useful you used to do with Assistant before they killed it?

john_strinlai 1 hour ago | parent

the problem is that it's bundled.

you either get search + all the ai stuff, or you get none of it. you can't just opt-in to search alone.

(in other words, title is accurate. block ai = no search)

dan_thinks 1 hour ago | parent

From the article, Google AI is deeply integrated with Google Search. So the article is correct - turning off one turns off the other.

From a privacy perspective, having all of this off by default is sensible. But only offering a basic product like Search if you opt into AI (when search as a capability does not need AI to function) - is newsworthy.

skeledrew 21 minutes ago | parent

> when search as a capability does not need AI to function

That means a far less capable search engine. Note that Google search has been AI-powered since before AI became a thing; it's now just more advanced, and particularly, explicitly publicized.

6thbit 1 hour ago | parent

Google blog says search will be off by default, alongside Gemini stuff.

And NYT says they would only be able to turn search on if they enable all of the Gemini stuff. That is not mentioned explicitly on google's blog. So not _that_ clickbaity?

kccqzy 1 hour ago | parent

> … and Google Search. Access to these products will be entirely off for K-12 student accounts until school administrators explicitly turn them on.

So yeah the blog post says Google Search itself will be entirely off until being turned on. There’s nothing in this blog post to indicate whether Google Search can be turned on without also turning on Gemini. Although I hate the NYT, the NYT is quoting someone from Google saying there won’t be separate controls for Gemini and Google Search.

account42 1 hour ago | parent

Hopefully this will backfire and end with kids learning to use other search engines.

messh 1 hour ago | parent

How is this not monopolistic behavior?

silverFork 44 minutes ago | parent

Their search engine is now integrated with Ai. So either google would need to block the search engine or the school if they don't want Ai. Take your pick.

ceejayoz 30 minutes ago | parent

That's the same argument Microsoft made with Internet Explorer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

brlewis 20 minutes ago | parent

Obviously they have at least a back-end search service that isn't tangled up with an LLM. When Gemini says "Searching the web..." it isn't chatbots all the way down. Google just needs to make a human UI for the same search Gemini uses.

arctic-true 21 minutes ago | parent

Yeah, I read this and immediately thought “tying arrangement.” But they’re not CHARGING separately for search and AI, so I doubt a tying theory would hold up in court.

TazeTSchnitzel 1 hour ago | parent

This comes off as comically evil. Disabling the AI summaries in search results is trivial, so them refusing to do so and blocking search entirely feels like a blatant attempt at coercion. Isn't it an abuse of monopoly power?

nsoam 1 hour ago | parent

That would make sense if the AI summaries from Search were a different product.

jdiff 58 minutes ago | parent

These summaries have been trivially bolted on, they're entirely self-contained, they can be easily turned off.

nsoam 51 minutes ago | parent

Some results also have thumbnails. They could easily be turned off. That doesn’t mean thumbnails are a different product, or an abuse of monopoly power.

Hamuko 42 minutes ago | parent

And sometimes they just fail to generate, while the search still shows the usual results.

krunck 1 hour ago | parent

https://archive.ph/RuwsB

tikkabhuna 1 hour ago | parent

It will be interesting to see what search engine students start using. I still use Google because that's what I used at school.

6thbit 52 minutes ago | parent

I think that's the largest shortsightedness of google's choice.

All those kids will get used to whatever other search they can use.

OroPla 1 hour ago | parent

What do schools need Google for anyway? Had education deteriorated this much already?

jdiff 1 hour ago | parent

Images for a slideshow, citations for an essay, research for a project?

antiframe 38 minutes ago | parent

Yes, when I was a student I never touched Google and don't understand why anyone would need it. /s

It's true, I used AltaVista and Yahoo! search because Google didn't exist yet.

ceejayoz 1 hour ago | parent

I really don't like that my original submission "Google Will Turn Off Search for Schools That Reject A.I." from the New York Times got replaced with "Designing responsible AI for learning" PR slop from Google Corporate that doesn't even disclose this limitation.

If the mods are gonna Orwell this, at least take my name off it.

edit: Thanks, mods, for putting it back.

jeltz 35 minutes ago | parent

Yeah, that is not ok at all. Flagged this post.

water-data-dude 28 minutes ago | parent

Yeah, that's disturbing behavior. Maybe I've been living under a rock, but I kinda assumed the mod team wouldn't blatantly whitewash like this

tomhow 22 minutes ago | parent

We were just applying the guidelines policy:

Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter.

The exception to this this where a source contains significant additional information that is not in the original source, which, as commenters have pointed out, seems to be true in this case.

ceejayoz 20 minutes ago | parent

> The exception to this this where a source contains significant additional information that is not in the original source…

This will virtually always be the case of a reputable news article about a PR announcement written by a corporate marketing department of this nature.

I would also note the same guideline says to use the original title, which was (and remains, as submitted) "Google Will Turn Off Search for Schools That Reject A.I."

ok_dad 21 minutes ago | parent

They are constantly tipping the scales here, and if you say so everyone will show up and claim they're the best mod team on the planet and totally fair and it's outrageous that you want to see accountability for mod actions via some sort of mod log and the mods will say that a mod log will allow some sort of bad actors to do something vague and threatening and they'll also use rules like a cudgel and claim a technical reading of some rule will absolve them. Then again, we are on a site run by a VC so what would you expect, of course they're going to tip the scales.

nilamo 56 minutes ago | parent

This is great! Google search has been declining in usefulness so much, that it shouldn't be used by students anyway. And then there's the shitty ai summaries, which students definitely shouldn't have to worry about whether or not it's accurate.

jeffbee 48 minutes ago | parent

It isn't possible for Google to run a websearch query "without AI" and it hasn't been for over 10 years.

morkalork 44 minutes ago | parent

Would you agree that there is a difference between "search results ranked by AI" and "Magic box that blurts out an answer"?

We do want to teach kids how to do searches, to look at and parse results and basically do "online research", right. Not just blindly trust the magic answer box?

skeledrew 15 minutes ago | parent

The "magic box" is really just summarizing the top X results, which have been ranked by AI for many years. Everyone has been "blindly trusting" all that for a good while now.

gdulli 39 minutes ago | parent

It's incredibly obtuse to pretend not to understand that people object to LLM slop, but not everything that can fall under the broad term of "AI".

0c3ca83 45 minutes ago | parent

For responsibile learning, focus on pencil, paper, and books.

mym1990 39 minutes ago | parent

Very narrow minded approach, why not use the tools available? Experimentation is one of the best ways to learn, breaking stuff is a great way to learn. Doesn’t mean that people won’t fall into some traps along the way, but that’s kind of the case with anything.

This is along the lines of “for responsible parenting, never let your kids out of sight”.

0c3ca83 35 minutes ago | parent

Yes, doing things by hand is another thing to prioritize.

A good deal of research shows that most learning happens when you recognize and back off from an incorrect solution on your own, without outside guidance. So, the key to a good learning environment is setting up scenarios where the backround information is present, and answers aren't out of reach, but there's a bit of struggle to find them.

This is also how you learn to learn, and develop grit. Grit is one of the best predictors of success.

Technology that gives answers or guides heavily is harmful to the learning process.

ceejayoz 34 minutes ago | parent

> Experimentation is one of the best ways to learn, breaking stuff is a great way to learn.

Breaking stuff sometimes is a way to learn "don't break that".

Broken children can be tough to fix.

walt_grata 32 minutes ago | parent

Its also an approach backed up by research and studdies. I still cannot believe there are people in education that can maintain that humans under 25 arent done neurologically developing ans have issues managing distractions and that tech in the classroom is a good idea (outside of classes deliberately teaching technology)

watwut 21 minutes ago | parent

Allowing teachers to experiment somewhat more would be great. It would be motivating for teachers and good for students in the long run.

Centrally forcing schools to do what is good for corporation is not experimentation.

Shorel 19 minutes ago | parent

I love old school research using books, however the advantages of connected information cannot be understated.

We could do much better with access to online libraries (which don't exist, apart from the very limited sample from these books accessible using Wikipedia).

Current (blogs and articles and forums) online resources provide information at a rate book search just can't provide.

HelloMcFly 43 minutes ago | parent

The changed title on this post is problematic.

ceejayoz 40 minutes ago | parent

I'm not a fan of "by ceejayoz" on a link and title I never even submitted, yeah.

edit: Looks like it was undone. Thank you, whoever that was.

jeltz 32 minutes ago | parent

The changed link is even more problematic.

gdulli 42 minutes ago | parent

A big part of this era is a shift to de-anonymizing all search, research, etc. That should be seen as its own problem separate from one's feelings about AI.

tlogan 37 minutes ago | parent

Very interesting approach. Basically, you can no longer use Google Search as a way to discover and learn about a subject the old-school way.

I guess the point here is that Google thinks schools need to start using AI, and that all this "no AI in schools" talk is nonsense.

miltonlost 24 minutes ago | parent

Google thinks forcing schools to use AI to fuel search will give them great cash. You have far too kind a view on what Google hopes AI will do to schools and not nearly a cynical economic one.

gmueckl 23 minutes ago | parent

Of course. They have a bridge^W^WAI to sell to you.

This is attempted coercion, plain and simple.

varjag 20 minutes ago | parent

KPIs have to be met

watwut 23 minutes ago | parent

Google thinks that will be more profitable if they force schools to use AI. They do not think "no AI in schools" talk is nonsense, they think "no AI in schools" is bad for their bottom line, somehow.

10111001 22 minutes ago | parent

> Very interesting approach. Basically, you can no longer use Google Search as a way to discover and learn about a subject the old-school way.

If by "interesting" you mean "abusive and coercive."

> I guess the point here is that Google thinks schools need to start using AI, and that all this "no AI in schools" talk is nonsense.

Explain that more please: whose talk is "nonsense"? Google's? Parents'? Schools'?

'Cause it sounds Google is saying this:

> You silly parents and educators, you thought you set educational policy for your students? No, we actually do. Your choices will conform to our business plans of the moment, or we will make your life so painful and difficult that you will "consent" to our demands.

> Did we mention our motto is "don't be evil"? We live our values every day.

walt_grata 22 minutes ago | parent

that is an absolutely repugnant take from anyone at Google (I will not attribute this to a legal entity that cannot think, a human being made this call and is accountable for it). They are not educators and should have absolutely zero say in how schools do things.

throwitaway222 19 minutes ago | parent

I mean technically I didn't even have Google search when I went to school.

Forgeties79 8 minutes ago | parent

There are a lot of things we didn’t have when we were younger that are far more necessary today than they were then.

1970-01-01 33 minutes ago | parent

Studies need to be done on how very terrible, bottom 5% of schools perform with all the extra AI help Google can enable. How could they possibly do worse with it running?

ceejayoz 28 minutes ago | parent

> How could they possibly do worse with it running?

It's almost always possible to do worse.

walt_grata 20 minutes ago | parent

using AI to tell you the answer means you don't actually know or understand the answer. You know the entire point of education

1970-01-01 8 minutes ago | parent

That's certainly one outcome. Another is having AI tell you the answer and you understanding why your answer is incorrect. This is not black and white.

skeledrew 31 minutes ago | parent

This is great! Push more people towards DuckDuckGo, etc.

ortusdux 27 minutes ago | parent

I've heard anecdotal stories from MS-365 users that say it feels handicapped without Copilot. One govt worker said they noticed a marked change in Word spell-checking after they had to block all AI on their systems.

miltonlost 25 minutes ago | parent

The economic elite really want to dumb children down at the same time of juicing their AI numbers by bundling LLMs and searches even when they don't need to be.

Shorel 24 minutes ago | parent

So, win-win and more traffic for Duck Duck Go?

That's how I read it nowadays, as Google search results are in a quality going down trend.

verdverm 5 minutes ago | parent

DDG is trying to be too much like Google now, with the Ai summaries and chat bot.

Actual search results are still bad. Seems to be a trend across most engines

starkeeper 18 minutes ago | parent

It's like the signed the "Let's be as evil as possible" pledge around 2016 isn't it. It's not just enshitification, it is evilshitification.

Aboutplants 14 minutes ago | parent

Oh no! What shall they do?

stetrain 14 minutes ago | parent

You can tell that AI features in user-facing software are good and popular because of the way that companies have to keep forcing them onto users even if they try to opt out.

vinyl7 12 minutes ago | parent

Its all very inorganic and forced. This only fuels the idea of it being a bubble that will pop (not if it will pop)

PowerElectronix 11 minutes ago | parent

Schools will ditch the AI AND the search engine, too. Masterfully played, google.

lestertomlin 8 minutes ago | parent

Google gets worse and worse every year.

noslenwerdna 8 minutes ago | parent

Wow, blatant monopoly behavior

godshatter 8 minutes ago | parent

Google really is an evil, enshittified company now. I see it every day when I'm on YouTube with an ad-blocker. "Experiencing interruptions?" Yeah, Google, thanks for fucking with me. If you don't want me viewing your videos, don't make them accessible on the standard protocols.

There are a host of other search engines. I use search.brave.com myself (after leta.mullvad.com was decommissioned).

Students will learn about other search engines, and about how corporations are not your friends. Both good lessons to learn.

Alexandros84 7 minutes ago | parent

Isn't Google Search a form of AI in its own right?