Maybe you ignore it, but Google has stated in the past that click-through rates with AI overviews are way down. To me, that implies the 'user' read the summary and got what they needed, such that they didn't feel the need to dig into a further site (ignoring whether that's a good thing or not).

I'd be comfortable calling a 'user' anyone who clicked to expand the little summary. Not sure what else you'd call them.

They're a bit less bad than they used to be. I'm not exactly happy about what this means to incentives (and rewards) for doing research and writing good content, but sometimes I ask a dumb question out of curiosity and Google overview will give it to me (e.g. "what's in flower food?"). I don't need GPT 5.1 Thinking for that.

"Since then, it’s been incredible to see how much people love it. AI Overviews now have 2 billion users every month."

Cringe. To get to 2 billion a month they must be counting anyone who sees an AI overview as a user. They should just go ahead and claim the "most quickly adopted product in history" as well.