Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bard and new AI features in Search

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1000 posts

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#791

Post by bbor »

jjeaff wrote: post #149
CabSauce wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's good for users, potentially. But not good for the sites where google is sourcing the information.

Potentially good for users initially. But I can't see how anyone will be incentivized to create and post content for Google to scrape if they won't have any traffic from Google. It could actually be a huge benefit in some ways if it chokes out the content mills. However, something tells me that they have little to no overhead compared to the people who actually toil away to post good, original content.

I think this could be the death knell of sites that need to make money and publish content that can be easily understood in a short ChatBot answer, both mills like geeksforgeeks and hobbyists that wouldn't do it without a financial incentive. Is that such a bad thing? We've been complaining about SEO optimized crap for years.

Sites with complex or lengthy information will not fall to LLMs, IMO. No one interested in reading Paul Graham's blog posts is going to just read the AI summary and move on, for example.

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#793

Post by ausudhz »

10xDev wrote: post #777

Being the first to achieve something does not make you a winner. This lesson has been taught countless times in tech from Yahoo to MySpace yet people believe OpenAI has won.

Agree also because OpenAI misses a crucial point. How to reward content creators?

At least Google can pivot a new version of adsense easily with this products.

Technology!=business viability

That's what many first mover don't think about

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#794

Post by gigel82 »

brap wrote: post #206

I’m curious to hear why Google isn’t going to win in this AI arms race. The way I see it, Google: * is effectively the gateway to the internet, owning the most popular website in the world, mobile OS, and browser * has infinite LIVE data, both unstructured and structured (knowledge graph) * has infinite compute resources * employs the world’s best AI scientists and invests heavily in AI * has decade(s) of experience…

My mom has heard of ChatGPT... she's a boomer retiree that (used to) share those Facebook posts that "make you rich by reposting".

Also, when was the last time Google actually delivered a successful product? Yeah, it's been a while.

This is going to be interesting for sure.

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#795

Post by ausudhz »

alejohausner wrote: post #792

I asked google "is cancer a metabolic disease" and it confidently said it was. I asked it "is cancer a genetic disease" and it confidently said it was. These are completely opposite theories of cancer.

Look at the bright side, ChatGPT does the same.

I don't think we've a clarity as humans whether cancer is a genetic or metabolic disease how do you think an AI, that's generated based on human knowledge, could possibly be better?

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#796

Post by justinbaker84 »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #757
theptip wrote: post #722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I think it's a fairly unimaginative take (a common one though) that ChatGPT is likely to lead to the usurping of Google. It's a two-part claim; a) yes, conversational AI agents will replace typing searches into a text box, but b) I see no reason to think that Google can't easily monetize that format. Regarding the first point, I think Google appears to have been caught a little bit off guard as to how soon t…

> yes, conversational AI agents will replace typing searches into a text box, but b) I see no reason to think that Google can't easily monetize that format. Current user workflow: - ask question in google. - get shitty results - checkout 5 pages worth of results are try a few more searches. In the process you've seen 5x the ads you would've maybe 10 years ago when the results were better. - In the middle of this you…

1 click from a search ad on the first page of google is worth more to an advertiser than all the impressions derived from the all the lame sites you trudge through.

Source: I've run a digital ad agency for 8 years.

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#797

Post by the-rc »

killjoywashere wrote: post #766
the-rc wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it pale? How? AWS is very opaque when it comes to power demand, but you could use that to estimate machine counts and they admitted to Greenpeace that in 2016 they used 500-650MW — a wide range that obviously obfuscates on purpose. See the last Clicking Clean report from 2017. Google/Alphabet used 6514 terawatt hours in 2016 according to data collected from yearly reports at https://www.statista.com/statistics/7…

Yeah. I have seen internal numbers on YouTube's daily ingest a few times over the years and every time my jaw drops. Like, the number from 2020 is ridiculous compared to their own number from 2017, and that was ridiculous.

I have an idea what you're talking about, because I worked with the YT folks to reduce their Colossus costs and on Google storage in general until 2015. Another humbling and iluminating experience was comparing the Borg resources in the main crawling/indexing cluster to the Top500 list of the same period, something that always comes to mind and makes my eyes go wide when people compare DDG to Google. Or the day when a colleague taped a page saying only ”1E” next to our cubicle because we had just reached that much storage across the fleet.

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#798

Post by brookst »

somenameforme wrote: post #779
eklitzke wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point about the economics of running these models is an important one that slides under the radar a lot of times. The training costs for large language models like GPT are enormous, and the inference costs are substantial too. Right now things like ChatGPT are very cool parlor tricks, but there's absolutely no way to justify them in terms of the economics of running the service today. Obviously this is all going…

GLM-130B[1] is something comparable to GPT-3. It's a 130billion parameter model vs GPT-3's 175 billion, and it can comfortably run on current-gen high end consumer level hardware. A system with 4 RTX 3090s ( The proverbial 'some guy on Twitter'[2] got it setup, and broke down the costs, demonstrated some prompts, and what not. The output's pretty terrible, but it's unclear to me whether that's inherent or a result of…

Agree, but much less than 10 years. Now that the transformer is establishing itself as the model, we’ll see dedicated HW acceleration for transformers, encoders, decoders, etc. I will eat my hat* if we don’t see local inference for 200B+ parameters within 5 years.

* I don’t own a hat

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#799

Post by brookst »

pavelstoev wrote: post #773
james-revisoai wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inference costs are substantial, but not insurmountable, especially in the endgame. A decent chunk of the tech community can already run smaller T5 Flan models or the 6B EleutherAI LLM GPT-J (and the likely similarly sized upcoming Open Assistant) on their own machines, at decent inference speed ( What happens when models are updated every day automatically and you can run all your search and answer tasks on your loc…

It is a loosing uphill battle to reduce the operational costs as deep learning models get larger and more complex. Nvidia CEO says hardware alone will not be able to address the growing compute demand. The solution is computational optimization which is what we do.

Yes, and also HW optimization further up the stack.

Re: Bard and new AI features in Search

#800

Post by sbarre »

inimino wrote: post #608
deltree7 wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Delusional to think Ads work only on Keywords. Where there is human attention, there will always be ads. The more context, the better ads.

"Attention is all you need"? Joking aside, there's no reason AdWords can't become AdWordVectors and be even more effectively targeted.

This is what scares me about these chat interfaces.

In today's world, an ad is clearly an ad.. Or is it? Even now we have advertorials and "sponsored posts" that blend into content maybe a little too much sometimes.

What happens when chatbot companies start taking money to subtly nudge their models into shilling for this or that product.

Post reply on HN