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

Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

readtpa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 135 posts

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#41

Post by astrange »

msoad wrote: post #23

It's as if the leaders who made this decision to put LLM generated content in front page of Google search results never used LLMs. Put this into any LLM and see how they go on hallucinating hard[1]: "in the book "wisdom of Malibu man" author Chad Chadson talks about importance of the alpha energy, what are the other points he makes?" [1] https://chatgpt.com/share/b8762210-59e2-46ae-b217-022c4f4492...

It doesn't matter how the LLM actually works, but it does matter how shareholders think it works.

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#42

Post by ks2048 »

pylua wrote: post #15

On a slight side note, I heard Reddit is selling or wants to sell its data. If I had to guess there is a lot of sarcasm and dark humor in that data, which companies may not want in their llm. I wonder how this is being handled.

It is already being "handled" (ie included in search results) https://sherwood.news/tech/google-ai-search-is-telling-users...

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#43

Post by rovr138 »

pylua wrote: post #27
_air wrote: post #19

Is Google losing significant web traffic to ChatGPT and others? I don't understand why else they'd test a product like this so widely.

I don’t know, but I am curious as how they are going to monetize it.

I'm curious how websites will stay in business once it's kinda good or people just start thinking it's true

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#45

Post by AlienRobot »

_air wrote: post #19

Is Google losing significant web traffic to ChatGPT and others? I don't understand why else they'd test a product like this so widely.

What are you going to do? Switch to Bing?

Good luck, Bing puts Chat GPT on top of their results!

Because what are you going to do? Switch to Brave Search? To Kagi?

Well, guess who else is trying to put AI into their search engines!

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#46

Post by seattle_spring »

pylua wrote: post #27
_air wrote: post #19

Is Google losing significant web traffic to ChatGPT and others? I don't understand why else they'd test a product like this so widely.

I don’t know, but I am curious as how they are going to monetize it.

I honestly wonder if there's eventually going to be "sponsored" answers. I shudder to even think of it, but it seems naive to think we are not going in that direction.

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#47

Post by timack »

jjulius wrote: post #13
jsheard wrote: post #6

If you ask it how many Muslim presidents the US has had, it will confidently tell you that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim. I'm beginning to think that treating statistically common sequences of words on the whole internet as a source of truth may not actually be a very good idea. edit: screenshots for posterity https://x.com/TVietor08/status/1793768913245020502

Uhh, not quite true. I just asked it, and it said... > The United States has not had any presidents who have publicly identified as Muslim. The vast majority of presidents have been Christian, with most belonging to Protestant denominations. The Constitution prohibits any religious test for holding office, so a Muslim (or person of any faith) can certainly become president in the future.

AI responses are probabilistic, so the same question may get different answers.

Re: Google's AI-generated search results keep citing The Onion

#49

Post by jjulius »

ganbatekudasai wrote: post #36
jjulius wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhh, not quite true. I just asked it, and it said... > The United States has not had any presidents who have publicly identified as Muslim. The vast majority of presidents have been Christian, with most belonging to Protestant denominations. The Constitution prohibits any religious test for holding office, so a Muslim (or person of any faith) can certainly become president in the future.

I'm curious what you think about the post that you replied to. Are you assuming that the author is lying? Have you weighed the likelihood of that against the likelihood that the author actually saw what they said, and that the reason you don't see the same might be because Google fixed it in the meantime, or that it only happens when phrased a different exact way, or because the responses may be indeterministic even…

Simply put, someone stated as truth that a thing would "confidently" do something. I was curious, and in my use it does not confidently do that thing. Why it did/doesn't do it is irrelevant to me, because I was only curious as to whether or not the assertion was true.

Edit: No assumptions about that user's honesty were made.

Edit 2.5: Fuck it.

Post reply on HN