> when Google used to do the same thing for you way before "AI"?
Which is never? Do you often just lie to win arguments? LLM gives you a synthesized answer, search engine only returns what already exists. By definition it can not give you anything that is not a super obvious match
> your stack traces were much different and superior and no one can have stack traces that are different from yours
Very few devs bother to post stack traces (or generally any programming question) online. They only do that when they're stuck so badly.
Most people work out their problem then move on. If no one posts about it your search never hits.
According to a quick search on google, which is not very useful these days, the maximum query length is 32 words or 2000 characters and change depending on which answer you trust.
Whatever it is specifically, the idea that you could just paste a 600 line stack trace unmodified into google, especially "way before AI" and get pointed to the relevant bit for your exact problem is obviously untrue.
> Which is never?
In my experience it was "a lot". Because my stack traces were mostly hardware related problems on arm linux in that period.
But I suppose your stack traces were much different and superior and no one can have stack traces that are different from yours. The world is composed of just you and your project.
> Do you often just lie to win arguments?
I do not enjoy being accused of lying by someone stuck in their own bubble.
When you said "Which is never" did you lie consciously or subconsciously btw?