Google AI summaries
Ranked 5 of 5 AI search engines by recommenders
People recommend it for fast, free, direct answers to simple questions, often in one sentence. The most common caveat is that the summaries are often wrong or cite sources that don't support them.
People recommend it for fast, free, direct answers to simple questions, often in one sentence. The most common caveat is that the summaries are often wrong or cite sources that don't support them.
50 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 13
- criticize it
- 37
- approval share
- 26%
Recommended in 7 of 13 months
- November 2025: recommended
- December 2025: recommended
- January 2026: recommended
- February 2026: recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: not recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: recommended
- September 2026: recommended
- October 2026: recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 13 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, met.
- 0.3 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, not met.
- Recommended in 7 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Helpful for most everyday questions
“I even enjoy Google AI summaries to some of the questions I now enter instead of search terms.”
Comment from 3 Dec 2025 in “Everyone in Seattle hates AI” “I find them helpful and click through to the cited sources.”
Comment from 13 Jan 2026 in “Google removes AI health summaries after investigation finds dangerous flaws” “90% of the time it gives me pointer for the thing I need”
Comment from 11 Oct 2026 in “The gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is widening” - Comment from 14 Dec 2025 in “Some surprising things about DuckDuckGo”
- Comment from 11 Oct 2026 in “The gap in shared understanding of LLM capability is widening”
Fast, free, direct answers
“it’s lightning fast (for an LLM capable of mid level reasoning), but more importantly unlimited and free”
Comment from 28 Feb 2026 in “Leaving Google has actively improved my life” “At least the Google AI summary gets to the point.”
Comment from 22 Sep 2026 in “Study: Young users (9 to 18Y) ditch Google for AI, with unknown consequences” “it answers the question in one sentence”
Comment from 17 Nov 2025 in “The fate of "small" open source” - Comment from 27 Feb 2026 in “Leaving Google has actively improved my life”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Often wrong or misleading answers
“If Google's AI summaries could actually provide correct answers with verifiable sources without so-called hallucinations, it would be good”
Comment from 11 Aug 2026 in “Google Search Is Dying. What Comes Next Is Worse” “Because the summary may be wrong, or technically correct but with entirely the wrong tone or missing key details a summary should have.”
Comment from 27 Jan 2026 in “Ask HN: What's the Point Anymore?” “The more I use gemini summaries for things I know a bit about, the worse my opinion of them”
Comment from 10 Nov 2025 in “LLMs are steroids for your Dunning-Kruger” - Comment from 13 Jan 2026 in “Google removes AI health summaries after investigation finds dangerous flaws”
Cited sources often don't support claims
“I don't know how many times I've seen some Google AI summary or ChatGPT with references that, when I checked, did not say what what the AI summary said”
Comment from 13 Apr 2026 in “Stanford report highlights growing disconnect between AI insiders and everyone” “quite often I click on the link provided and it doesn't support the statement Google made”
Comment from 2 Sep 2026 in “A third of Perplexity's citations don't contain the number they're cited for” “I can count on a single hand the time I have found a correct citation.”
Comment from 2 Sep 2026 in “A third of Perplexity's citations don't contain the number they're cited for” Mostly comedic, assault on reason
“Those summaries (and Bing is at least as culpable) are mostly only good for comedy value.”
Comment from 2 Sep 2026 in “A third of Perplexity's citations don't contain the number they're cited for” “The AI summary on Google search results is so bad it represents an assault on reason.”
Comment from 25 May 2026 in “The Eternal Sloptember” Looks like results, harms sites
“Hey btw, how do "AI" summaries on Google search look? Exactly like honest [1] results, like they did with ads?”
Comment from 19 Jan 2026 in “West Midlands police chief quits over AI hallucination” “Their 'AI summary' feature shifted a lot of marketshare from sites that provide information to Google”
Comment from 1 Mar 2026 in “I built a demo of what AI chat will look like when it's "free" and ad-supported”
Other AI search engines people recommend
The four most recommended other AI search engines, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perplexity | 121 | 102 | 54% | 12 | 1 yr7 owners | — |
| Kagi Assistant | 79 | 20 | 80% | 12 | — | Approved |
| Google AI Mode | 74 | 92 | 45% | 12 | — | — |
| Phind | 36 | 18 | 67% | 3 | 1 yr3 owners | — |
| Google AI summariesThis page | 13 | 37 | 26% | 7 | — | — |
What people said
40 of the 51 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“I watched my PCP read the Google AI summary to me in office”
“90% of the time it gives me pointer for the thing I need”
“adequate for 99% of what I need”
“Their AI summary very often insists on replying in the (IP) local language”
“I like Google's new summaries; coaching relationships is crossing the line from search engine to something that's not a search engine.”
“At least the Google AI summary gets to the point.”
“I've also never know anyone who finds them trustworthy”
“Those summaries (and Bing is at least as culpable) are mostly only good for comedy value.”
“I can count on a single hand the time I have found a correct citation.”
“Google putting AI search summaries is the worst of all worlds.”
“quite often I click on the link provided and it doesn't support the statement Google made”
“If I wanted an LLM's interpretation I'd have just asked a search-enabled LLM in the first place.”
“If Google's AI summaries could actually provide correct answers with verifiable sources without so-called hallucinations, it would be good”
“I can STILL replicate this behavior in Google AI summaries 10% of the time”
“Never trust Google AI summaries, it hallucinates like crazy.”
“The AI summary on Google search results is so bad it represents an assault on reason.”
“Google's "AI summary" which is wrong half of the time”
“torpedoing confidence in LLMs with their search AI summaries”
“I don't know how many times I've seen some Google AI summary or ChatGPT with references that, when I checked, did not say what what the AI summary said”
“Their 'AI summary' feature shifted a lot of marketshare from sites that provide information to Google”
“it’s lightning fast (for an LLM capable of mid level reasoning), but more importantly unlimited and free”
“it really just answers what i want”
“Google auto-summaries have made wikipedia less relevant”
“Because the summary may be wrong, or technically correct but with entirely the wrong tone or missing key details a summary should have.”
“Hey btw, how do "AI" summaries on Google search look? Exactly like honest [1] results, like they did with ads?”
“It took being a meme for a literal year for them to remove this”
“The summary feature in google uses a quick and inaccurate AI model.”
“There are summaries that say exactly the opposite of the correct result.”
“I find them helpful and click through to the cited sources.”
“How could they even offer that without a Medical Device license?”
“Notice how little this sentence says about whether anything is any good.”
“unbelievably bad compared to their Gemini offerings”
“Google's AI summaries are awful more times than not.”
“Does that figure count the AI Summaries at the top of Google search results”
“Google's AI summaries are consistently accurate when retrieving technical information”
“I do find Google's AI summaries helpful”
“I even enjoy Google AI summaries to some of the questions I now enter instead of search terms.”
“harvesting the work of others without credit or compensation”
“it answers the question in one sentence”
“The more I use gemini summaries for things I know a bit about, the worse my opinion of them”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.