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

ChatGPT Search

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Search

#721

Post by NetOpWibby »

freediver wrote: post #241

Been thinking about this a lot [1]. Will this fundamentally change how people find and access information? How do you create an experience so compelling that it replaces the current paradigm? The future promised in Star Trek and even Apple's Knowledge Navigator [2] from 1987 still feels distant. In those visions, users simply asked questions and received reliable answers - nobody had to fact-check the answers ever. C…

> Advancing models without advancing search is like having a michelin star chef work with spoiled ingredients.

What a great analogy

Re: ChatGPT Search

#722

Post by c0redump »

modeless wrote: post #316
marckrn wrote: post #295

OpenAI also provides a Chrome Extension ( https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/chatgpt-search/ejcf... ) to trigger a search from the omnibar as the default search engine. If you don't like that (like I do), you can also manually add it under Site Search using https://chatgpt.com/?q=%s&hints=search

First impression: Far too slow to replace Google Search for this use. I frequently get 5+ seconds of waiting before the first word of a response shows up, vs. less than 1 for Google (which is not as fast as it used to be). OpenAI has a lot of work to do on latency. I can definitely see this new search feature being useful though. The old one was already useful because (if you asked) you could have it visit each resul…

I can’t help but wonder if the lag time in chatgpt responses is artificial and intentional, to prevent people spamming requests.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#723

Post by DeathArrow »

whizzter wrote: post #300

This is probably Google's Altavista moment, by making their results crappier by the year in search of Ad dollars everyone has felt that there is a potential for search to be better and once that becomes available they'll be in a continious game of catch-up. Yes, Google has their own AI divisions, tons of money and SEO is to blame for part of their crappiness. But they've also _explicitly_ focused on ad-dollars over a…

> But they've also _explicitly_ focused on ad-dollars over algorithmic purity

I think they prioritized large and fast incomes over long, steady incomes.

Also, there isn't just money that taints Google search results. It's also censorship and political motivation, which is mostly obvious in image search.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#724

Post by DeathArrow »

GolfPopper wrote: post #602

Every time I see one of these topics, I go ask chat GPT a question to which I know the answer on a topic where I would like to be able to get useful answers to similar questions that I do not know the answer to. This time it was, "Did Paul Edwin Zimmer write a fourth Dark Border novel?" (Real answer: Yes, Ingulf the Mad . You can find the answer on his Wikipedia page.[1]) ChatGPT's[2] answer: "Yes, Paul Edwin Zimmer…

If AI produces a correct answer for something you know, there's no guarantee that it produces the correct answer for something you don't know. I'd rather find a way to verify that answer, if that answer has any importance.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#725

Post by ulfw »

freediver wrote: post #241

Been thinking about this a lot [1]. Will this fundamentally change how people find and access information? How do you create an experience so compelling that it replaces the current paradigm? The future promised in Star Trek and even Apple's Knowledge Navigator [2] from 1987 still feels distant. In those visions, users simply asked questions and received reliable answers - nobody had to fact-check the answers ever. C…

But what if I don't want simple answers?

What if I am looking for a medical page or a technical page or whatever else where I need to see, read, experience actual content and not some AI summary?

Re: ChatGPT Search

#726

Post by vishnugupta »

Eduard wrote: post #594
devjab wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s what is the natural consequence of handing over management to MBA types. They can’t create new things. I don’t mean that they should be programmers, engineers or whatever they’re working with. I mean that they can only exact value from something that already exists. Which is always going to be a short term strategy because the only way to do that is to make “the it” worse. I’m not sure Facebook fits in c…

> I’m not sure Facebook fits in considering they at least managed to get some other products along the way can you name these products?

Instagram, WhatsApp. Granted that these were acquisitions but they have nicely been integrated into their overall product suite.

And now their VR products.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#728

Post by space_oddity »

whizzter wrote: post #300

This is probably Google's Altavista moment, by making their results crappier by the year in search of Ad dollars everyone has felt that there is a potential for search to be better and once that becomes available they'll be in a continious game of catch-up. Yes, Google has their own AI divisions, tons of money and SEO is to blame for part of their crappiness. But they've also _explicitly_ focused on ad-dollars over a…

The internal politics and shifts in focus you've mentioned make it harder to believe that they're truly dedicated to that goal right now

Re: ChatGPT Search

#729

Post by marcus_holmes »

panarky wrote: post #704
marcus_holmes wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that this is the core question, but I'd put it as: Who Gets To Decide What Is True? With a search paradigm this wasn't an issue as much, because the answers were presented as "here's a bunch of websites that appear to deal with the question you asked". It was then up to the reader to decide which of those sites they wanted to visit, and therefore which viewpoints they got to see. With an LLM answering the que…

> An LLM trawling the web could very conceivably come up with a non-truthful answer. LLMs don't uncritically "trawl" the web, ingesting and then blindly regurgitating what they find. 98% of the internet is crap, yet LLM results don't reflect this dismal figure. They're amazingly good at distilling the 2% that is non-crap.

Sure. Probably trawling was the wrong word and conveyed a technically-inaccurate meaning. I'm not sure what the correct word would be.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#730

Post by space_oddity »

wodenokoto wrote: post #684
greenavocado wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has google completely stopped working for anyone else? I can still search things, i get results but, they're an ordered list of popular places the engine is directing me to. Some kind of filtering is occurring on nearly every search i make that's making the results feel entirely useless. Image search stopped working sometime ago and now it just runs an AI filter on whatever image you search for, tells you there's a m…

I think calling it "completely stopped working" is a bit over the top. It doesn't feel magical, and it particularly doesn't feel like a gateway to new and interesting places on the internet, like it used to. But I still make hundreds of searches on google every day, so obviously it is working.

Back in the day, Google searches could lead you down unplanned paths, into niche forums or fascinating rabbit holes that felt organic and less commercial.
Post reply on HN