301–310 of 550 posts
The article starts, "Nestled in the hills of Mountain View", which is worrisome, because as anyone with even a passing familiarity with Silicon Valley geography knows, Mountain View is mostly flat. And Google's Mountain View offices are located on reclaimed baylands, which are especially flat. I wonder if the article authors were thinking of Xerox PARC's offices in Palo Alto's hills? Or the road named "Sand Hill Road…
I do not understand the appeal or gpt-powered searches. Most of my web searches are for looking up specific things, to find the specific link(s) that contains the information I need. These aren’t searches that are going to be made better or faster by an ML model-they’re not natural language queries, they’re just a bunch of terms.
Beyond that, most of the results that rank for anything are plainly worse LLM blogspam padded for SEO. All you're doing here is cutting out the middleman.
The problem with chat gpt for factual question search is, of course, that it's not factual. It's job is to produce coherent sentences, not actually tell you factual information. So until they manage to get that right it's not a superior product.
There are two types of search, people looking for a specific resource (like searching for a song on youtube) and people just looking for an answer to a question. If a LLM can be factually accurate, its a superior search product for that specific use, which is probably the majority of search.
Sorry to break it to you folks but if you hated your data being with Google, you are in for a surprise on how atrociously bad Microsoft is at privacy and security. Multiple close friends who have worked at Microsoft tell me that search history data - who is searching what, is basically sitting in systems with ACLs so bad that 20-30K employees have access through transitive membership of groups. To access a customer's…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
in the long history of ML, tensorflow is not that significant. realistically, nearly everything it did was available in other systems before. It was really just a grab for Google to try to get everybody to use their framework. But it wasn't a good framework, and it evolved terribly. MapReduce was not and isn't something that made ML possible. It made data engineering at scale possible.
> in the long history of ML, tensorflow is not that significant. I don't necessarily disagree, but that's only from a technical pov. However, I think the release of it as a open-source library made it so that it's far easier to learn the tech that already existed. Vast majority of university courses use it to teach lots of different concepts that were far more "mathy" before. > MapReduce was not and isn't something t…
Both MR and TF are net-negative for the outside world. I think more unis teach pytorch than TF now.
It's been a while since they stopped innovating. Although Google, Maps, Youtube are of daily use they are monetized exclusively by advertising which is annoying and hated by many. It has been many years since Google has launched an innovative new product. I don't think ChatGPT will gain daily traction after this hype. Anyway we could say that MSFT and AMZN have demostrated more power to innovate with different busine…
Google stopped being innovative the second their "20% Time" got gutted: > Employees were encouraged to spend up to twenty-percent of their paid work time pursuing personal projects. The objective of the program was to inspire innovation in participating employees and ultimately increase company potential. For Google's part, Gmail and AdSense both arose out of side projects. In 2013, Google discontinued 20 percent tim…
> Once trained on this giant corpus of natural language, the chatbot can, when prompted by users’ instructions, produce a fluently written answer rather than merely serving up a list of links. A word salad of untrustworthy bullshit instead of the pages you were looking for is not going to upend search. It's not a replacement for search in any way. Now if the search engine could find pages which satisfy complex querie…
I'm old enough that I remember switching between Yahoo, AskJeeves, AltaVista, and others, before abandoning them all for Google. I also remember experimenting with a friend to test the search engines, and I remember the question/query I used to perform the test: I had (at the time) a vague recollection that the level of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans near the Panama Canal is different; that in addition to raising sh…
> However, the impact of salinity on the difference in sea level between the Atlantic and Pacific sides of the Panama Canal is also relatively small, as differences in salinity in the canal are primarily caused by fresh water inputs from rivers and rainfall, rather than differences in ocean salinity.
Surely "differences in salinity in the canal" are not what's relevant to the sea level on each side and how much impact ocean salinity has on that.
A fine example, I suggest, of how it does not understand things; it just spews out plausible strings of words.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use Phone, nor Maps, nor Youtube, nor Kubernetes, all the things you listed. They're helpful to you, not me.
this setup and response seem a little silly to me. "what did the romans ever do for me?" "roads? aquaducts?" "ha! I don't go anywhere and drink well water!"
The article starts, "Nestled in the hills of Mountain View", which is worrisome, because as anyone with even a passing familiarity with Silicon Valley geography knows, Mountain View is mostly flat. And Google's Mountain View offices are located on reclaimed baylands, which are especially flat. I wonder if the article authors were thinking of Xerox PARC's offices in Palo Alto's hills? Or the road named "Sand Hill Road…
Shoreline is kind of hilly even if the hills are landfill.