Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

news.ycombinator.com

551–560 of 609 posts

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#551
I don’t trust LLMs for search and neither should anyone. I speak as a professional tester. They are essentially untested. It should offend us all that OpenAI puts such unreliable software out there.

Unlike Google, or Duck Duck Go, which serve up links that we can instantly judge are relevant to us, LLM spin stories that sound pretty good but may be and often are insidiously wrong. It’s too much effort to fact check them, so people don’t.

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#552

Search is primarily a portal - you know a particular resource exists, you just don't know its exact URL. You hear about this new programming language called "Frob", and you assume it must have a website. So you google "Frob language". You hear that there was a plane crash in DC, and assume (CNN/AP/your_favorite_news_site) has almost certainly written an article about it. You google "DC plane crash." LLMs aren't ever…

>LLMs aren't ever going to replace search for that use case, simply because they're never going to be as convenient.

What? On Planet Earth, this is already a thing.

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO an example of a good use case for an LLM, which would be otherwise very hard to search for, is clarifying vague technical concepts. Just yesterday I was trying to remember the name of a vague concept I’d forgotten, with my overall question being: “Is there a technical term in biology for the equilibrium that occurs between plant species producing defensive toxins, and toxin resistance in the insect species that f…

I just want to say that this thread / the responses to your question are better than either search engines or LLMs can ever come up with, and shows the truth of Cunningham's Law: "The best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer" Or updated for the LLM age, "the best way to get the right answer from an LLM is not to ask it a question and use its answer; it's…

The responses to GP's comment are surprisingly entertaining to read. I'm entirely engaged in this nerdy semantics war on a topic I know nothing about and loving it.

Time to pop some popcorn and hit refresh.

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Gemini? I asked 2.5 Pro and this was the result- https://g.co/gemini/share/b5e5ea80548b Seems entirely reasonable to me. Didn't have to trick it into providing citations.

Ahh, I'm only on 2.0 Flash.

Are you using AI studio?

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs aren't ever going to replace search for that use case, simply because they're never going to be as convenient. Sounds trivial to integrate an LLM front end with a search engine backend (probably already done), and be able to type "frob language" and it gives you a curated clickable list of the top resources (language website, official tutorial, reference guide, etc) discarding spam and irrelevant search engine…

That's called a search engine. We've had them for 30 years. Ahhhhhhhhhhhghh. It's blockchain all over again.

>That's called a search engine. We've had them for 30 years

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

The LLM could "intelligently" pick from the top several pages of results, discard search engine crap results and spam, summarize each link for you, and so on.

We don't have that now (or for 30 years - I should know, I was there, using Yahoo!, and Altavista, and Lycos and such back in the day).

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#558
I have repeatedly tried to use LLMs as search engines, both general (like ChatGPT) or more focused on specific domains.

I have not been impressed by the results. In my experience, LLMs used this way generally output confident-sounding information but have one of two problems the majority of the time:

- The information is blatantly wrong, from a source that doesn't exist.

- The information is subtly wrong, and generated a predictive chain that doesn't exist from part of a source.

I have found them about on-par with the reliability of a straightforward Google search with no constraints, but that is more of a condemnation of how poor Google's modern performance as a search engine is, than an accolade for using LLMs for search.

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#559

Search is primarily a portal - you know a particular resource exists, you just don't know its exact URL. You hear about this new programming language called "Frob", and you assume it must have a website. So you google "Frob language". You hear that there was a plane crash in DC, and assume (CNN/AP/your_favorite_news_site) has almost certainly written an article about it. You google "DC plane crash." LLMs aren't ever…

Yea 'needle in a haystack' style search is something that LLM based search is simply not as good at.

The reason Google is still seeing growth (in revenue etc.) is that for a lot 'commercial' search still ends with this kind of action.

Take purchasing a power drill for example, you might use an LLM for some research on what drills are best, but when you're actually looking to purchase you probably just want to find the product on Home Depot/Lowe's etc.

Re: Ask HN: Do you still use search engines?

#560
Mostly GPT, but for World of Warcraft, GPT is absolutely horrible. It's like it has been corrupted by the 20 years of bad/incorrect user data, or maybe just the sheer amount of it in general.

As an example, someone typo'd an abbreviation, so I asked GPT and it gladly made up something for me. So I gave it a random abbreviation, and it did the same (using its knowledge of the game).

Even when I tell it the specific version I'm playing it gets so much wrong it's basically useless. Item stats, where mobs are located, how to do a certain quest - anything. So I'm back to using websites like wowhead and google.

Post reply on HN