Google Search Hits All-Time Usage Record (cnbc.com)
- Reference: 0184383202
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/07/09/1829252/google-search-hits-all-time-usage-record
- Source link: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/08/world-cup-drives-google-search-to-record-queries-per-second.html
> The milestone comes as the company tries to prove its traditional search engine can keep its relevance in the age of AI, where chatbots have become more prevalent. Google still controls 90% of the search market, its stock price has more than doubled in the past year and revenue growth in the first quarter was the fastest for any period since 2022.
>
> Google said its top searched query after the game was "argentina vs egypt." Globally, the company also saw people searching for things like "argentina x colombia" and "how many world cup goals does messi have." Additional queries included "what is it called when a player hits another player in game" and "is it messi's last world cup."
[1] https://x.com/thefox/status/2074878171392909774?s=20
[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/08/world-cup-drives-google-search-to-record-queries-per-second.html
Also the Trump presidency (Score:1)
Has the highest number of people employed ever. Because of course it does. Population growth is a thing after all. It is slowing but we're probably 50 years out from it going in reverse assuming human civilization doesn't just shit the bed.
So yeah the entire premise of this article is kind of a well duh. Makes me wonder if it's lazy AI slop or lazy human slop
I do not use da goog (Score:1)
I hope there are others It smells.
Huh? (Score:2)
> the company tries to prove its traditional search engine can keep its relevance in the age of AI
I would suggest the obsession with attaching AI to the search page/field/results like a parasite is not an indication they are trying very hard.
Queeries per second? (Score:4, Funny)
Come on Google, that's no way to talk about World Cup fans!
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly not when Egypt is one of the teams...
All caused by CFS Syndrome (Score:2)
Google users have been complaining for a few years of CFS (Can't Find Sh*t) since the AI take over. Of course "search" is at a an all time high - it now take 3 searches to get what you used to get in 1.
We need Google (Score:2)
... to answer the Zen question: What better search engines are out there?
Re: (Score:2)
Use startpage.com. It's Google without the tracking.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember before Google using Altavista and scrolling through like 30 pages of results to find something.
Re: (Score:3)
And now we just give up and find ways to reword everything.
Google was better than Altavista when AV was a thing. Once the effective competition disappeared and the term "Google" became synonymous with searching, they broke their product in the name of "engagement".
The really weird part to me is why none of the modern alternatives (DDG, Startpage, etc) are better. How hard could it be to implement a hard "include only these words, exactly as I spelled them"?
Re: (Score:2)
> How hard could it be to implement a hard "include only these words, exactly as I spelled them"?
The issue is, I think, that those of us who want search engines to work exactly like that are in the minority.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been paying for Kagi ($10/mo?) now for over a year across both personal and work devices and I don't miss it at all. The only time I still use google is if I need to buy a product and want to see what is available besides what is on amazon, i'll seach "toaster oven" to get inundated with ads (and then 12-48 hours later see ads for toaster oven across all my social medias and youtube). Turning off the googs cold-turkey and then selectively using it, it's been very interesting to see what kind of targete