> 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.

> 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.

More generously, it seems like Google just doesn't see a justification for maintaining an AI-free search platform alongside their AI-integrated vision for search.

For a smaller vendor in a competitive market, this decision wouldn't read like coercion. It would just be a roadmap statement that might draw some customers in and drive some towards competitors. You would expect a business to be able to make that kind of decision (a prima facie reasonable one) about how they'll invest in their products and the support infrastructure that surrounds them.

What this story really exposes is how dependent schools have been made on Google specifically and how the idea of independently making choices against their roadmap feels infeasible. It feels like a monopoly to administrators and the public even if it isn't formally marked as such by regulatory agencies.

That itself is worth more people thinking about.

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.

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.

well, they gotta get those kids hooked on ai while they're young you know

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.

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

This is attempted coercion, plain and simple.

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

[dead]

Founders stopped running it, same story as IBM

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?

> … 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.

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.

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?

> 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.

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)

the truth is not what you think is the truth

Search is off; if you want it back on, you get Gemini summaries with it. you can't get Search _without_ Gemini

Scummy wording makes it looks like google is giving more control, but it's really the opposite.