过去20年，搜索领域经历了数次变革性的代际跃迁。 从2001年中国初代自研的网页搜索引擎上线，填补中文搜索空白，到2019年，ERNIE语义模型在搜 索上线，用户可以用自然语言、甚至口语化的问题来发起搜索，中文搜索的每一次技术迭代与功能升 级，本质都是对用户需求的精准呼应与深度满足。 如果说早期的搜索是帮人在信息海洋中"捞针"，依靠关键词匹配实现从无到有的信息触达，那么如今 的搜索早已超越了单纯的信息检索范畴，成为连接人、信息与服务的核心纽带。 AI时代，当下用户的搜索需求正在发生质的变化， 更多此前没有被用户所表达的需求正在被释放出 来。 无论是规划一场旅行，还是构思一条创意内容，人们希望通过一次搜索就能获取完整结果。 显然，传统搜索"只给原料不给成品"的碎片式供给，已无法匹配用户的整体性需求。 在大模型技术全面渗透的当下，11月13日，百度宣布重塑搜索系统，正式发布"百度猎户座"AI引 擎。其作为搜索背后的超级大脑，通过对信息、工具、富媒体内容、服务的统一链接与深度融合，正 重新定义AI时代的搜索。这一变革也直接将搜索行业推向了转型临界点，一场全新的范式革命已然 到来。 搜索行业重塑 今年7月，百度搜索团 ...

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. District Court judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google does not need to divest its Chrome browser, alleviating the "breakup crisis" the company faced, but it is prohibited from entering into any exclusive agreements [1][3]. Group 1: Google's Legal Situation - The court's ruling means Google successfully avoided the worst-case scenario of being forced to divest its core assets, including Chrome and Android [3]. - Judge Mehta noted significant changes in the internet search industry since the case began, particularly the rise of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), which influenced the court's decision to impose relatively lenient restrictions on Google [3][4]. - The Department of Justice's push for forced divestiture was deemed excessive by the judge, as Google did not use its assets to impose illegal restrictions [4]. Group 2: Restrictions Imposed on Google - Although Google is not required to divest, the court imposed several restrictions, including the obligation to provide certain search data to eligible competitors and a ban on exclusive agreements related to services like Chrome and Google Search [4]. - The ruling does not prevent Google from making payments to distributors, as a broad payment ban could harm downstream interests [4]. - Google expressed concerns about privacy regarding the data-sharing requirements and indicated it would appeal the ruling, suggesting that the data-sharing decision may not take immediate effect [4]. Group 3: Market Reactions and Implications - Following the favorable ruling, Google's stock price rose nearly 7% in after-hours trading [2]. - The ruling also positively impacted Apple's stock price, as it preserves the long-standing agreement where Google pays Apple billions annually to be the default search engine on Safari [5][6]. - The court's decision clarified the distinction between "default settings" and "exclusive agreements," allowing for continued collaboration between Google and Apple [6]. - Analysts believe the ruling is a win for both Google and Apple, with potential for future collaboration in artificial intelligence [7].