Oh so youre saying that AI companies can control what the AI says?
So meta letting their AI sext with children was intentional then…
Trump has dementia confirmed
Dimensia Donny seems like a nickname that could fit
Dinky Dick Dimensia Don
Diddles Diminutive Daughters
How about “Donnie Dementia”?
lmfao. Google isn’t the only search engine.
This isn’t about what you use, it’s about what the majority of the voting public uses and the influence on them.
Ok, so don’t look for an AI response? Sure, Google censoring results is shit, google NOT censoring results about the same query about Biden is even shittier, but you still get search results about the question.
Google is evil.
Wtf, confirmed. Ask about any person, any president on if they have dementia or not and it’ll answer
Ask about trump and it refused to interact, just dumps a search results window with funnily enough the first result being a page about how Google is censoring this
Surfacing the result of how they are censoring the results might be a canary in a coal mine, we can’t say we’re doing it but we can make the top result someone else saying we’re doing it.
The incentives don’t allow for this shit in an organization like Google. They can only respond to stock price and earnings.
Very likely someone back channeled a demand and they folded like a deck of cards.
So the team responsible for that AI box added Trump dementia to the list of things it won’t respond to.
The team responsible for the news bits didn’t get the request so that just shows up in its place.
True for the organization as a whole, but a pissed off engineer or two could have done it, and the people above them are just leaning on “it’s the algorithm” since they don’t agree with the censorship either.
I’m sure the C Suite will step in and make them change it but it takes time for them to address the issue.
I’m not saying that’s what is going on, but I’ve witnessed my own department head pull similar tricks, albeit his tricks weren’t as high stakes as this would be.
So you’re saying that we should do more AI searches for “Trump Dementia”
… and use variations of it like … “Trump old losing his mind”, “Trump old senile”, “Trump dementia don”, “Donny Dementia”, “Ding Dong Dementia Donny Trump”
Google AI has dementia
Kagi,brave, startpage, ddg, are good to go. Trump def has dementia
I’ve been a Kagi user for over a year and I usually hate AI summaries. Though I must say I love how Kagi has implemented them as it gives sources where it found the info so you can dig deeper and see if what it said was actually correct.
Kagi’s summaries are great.
They’re hidden by default, requiring you to click the button first. They don’t extrapolate too much. And their sources will be the exact same links you got from the search.
I just put a question mark at the end and it does it automatically. Works like a charm.
Their AI is pretty good, both assistant and search summaries. Been using it extensively as it actually provides correct and objective information (at least more often than others). It is also privacy-first, so you don’t get those annoying personality shifts as with like GPT.
I use mojeek, and startpage sometimes. Ddg is too influenced now, they do the same stuff Google does. Brave is run by people who hate LGBT people so I can’t support them in good conscience.
The post is likely referring to a long-standing controversy around Brendan Eich, the founder and CEO of Brave (the browser and search engine company). In 2008, Eich donated $1,000 to support California's Proposition 8, a ballot measure that banned same-sex marriage (later overturned by courts). This came to light in 2014 when he was briefly appointed CEO of Mozilla, leading to widespread backlash from employees, users, and activists who viewed it as anti-LGBTQ+. Eich resigned from Mozilla after just 11 days amid the outcry, expressing regret for causing pain but not fully recanting his views. Some people, including in the LGBTQ+ community and allies, continue to avoid or criticize Brave on these grounds, seeing it as support for leadership with historically discriminatory stances. This isn't a "new" issue in 2025—it's tied to events from over a decade ago—but it persists in discussions about ethical tech choices. Brave has faced other unrelated controversies (e.g., ad practices), but this one specifically relates to anti-LGBT perceptions. For more details: - [Wikipedia on Brendan Eich](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich) - [Article on the Mozilla controversy](https://www.osnews.com/story/27646/the-new-mozilla-ceos-political-past-is-imperiling-his-present/) - [Recent discussion on Brave controversies](https://www.reddit.com/r/browsers/comments/1j1pq7b/list_of_brave_browser_controversies/) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43300333well fuck! brave is the one browser that fits all my needs.
This is probably payback for letting them off the hook on the monopoly suits. Expect more “payback” as they manipulate the narrative.
There’s no such thing as freedom here.
Good thing I stopped using google a long time ago.
The whole value in searching is to get me to primary sources in a reasonably efficient way. Everything about AI is inserting extra middle men. I just don’t understand how anyone tolerates it.
Why would anyone need to search that tbh
L M A O
