>>> If Google just displayed links to users, then the user might actually click them
And ironically, this has the effect of making Google Search even worse. Whether someone clicked on a link used to be a signal to Google’s search algorithm that the link (or at least the title and snippet) was relevant. And there’s no quality feedback loop at all for the embedded info boxes.
> And there’s no quality feedback loop at all for the embedded info boxes.
Actually, there is feedback for so-called non-organic SERP elements. You can check whether a user clicked the next result after an element, which is a signal of uselessness of the element. On mobile devices you could also check whether user continued scrolling after seeing the element. Both signals are used by search companies.
And what's missing from that assumption is users who see an incorrect info box, assume it's correct, and move on without clicking anything. The effects cancel out.
Yep, but that's also true in the case of classic links. If there is false information on the site behind a link (or in the snippet), which a user perceives as true, there is no way for a search engine to gather it from user's behavior.
And ironically, this has the effect of making Google Search even worse. Whether someone clicked on a link used to be a signal to Google’s search algorithm that the link (or at least the title and snippet) was relevant. And there’s no quality feedback loop at all for the embedded info boxes.