Ironic to use AI writing to complain about AI search results to advertise your product. But to the point, being an old school firefox user I still have separate address and search bars. My main search engine on my PC is 'google (web only)' which opens directly to the web tab which only has result links. I'm dreading the day they remove it as a feature.
I don't want my search engine to think for me
41–50 of 73 posts
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#42I use SearchTool in the Agent program, but when using search engines, I usually use simple keywords and the search results may contain too much noise, but I still use the AI search results as a reference, which is not an either A or B thing for me
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#43There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. Searching in AI mode will mean your query is going to need to be a bit more pointed. The example given is you want evidence from an original source in Stack Overflow. So instead of just typing a few keywords and digging through pages, your query needs to ask Google exactly what you want and the format you want it in. If that’s a list of Sta…
In other words, for the primary uses of search things have gotten much worse, but some workarounds still exist.
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#44There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. Searching in AI mode will mean your query is going to need to be a bit more pointed. The example given is you want evidence from an original source in Stack Overflow. So instead of just typing a few keywords and digging through pages, your query needs to ask Google exactly what you want and the format you want it in. If that’s a list of Sta…
I can’t decide whether this is sarcasm or not. “You are holding it wrong” kinda sidesteps the issue that the results are fundamentally different.
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#45"Search" is a ridiculous thing to be doing post-2022. Imagine going to a doctor and asking them a question, and they give you 5 printouts for your to read through to synthesize your own answer. Imagine you asked your spouse a question and they responded "Here's 10 links for you to check out!" We have AI now and it's doing a mostly incredible job getting us ANSWERS, not SEARCH LINKS. Trying to pretend that links are b…
> We have AI now and it's doing a mostly incredible job getting us ANSWERS, not SEARCH LINKS. Trying to pretend that links are better is just trying to copy with rapid change.
If you feel that it's better, you are free to use it. Leave the rest of us, who think AI is bad at finding information and want to search, in peace so we can work the way we like. I don't think that's an unreasonable expectation: you can work the way you like, and I can work the way I like.
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#46I love AI summary and AI mode in Google search. I think it should be up to you (the human) to use your judgement to decide when to do further research by following the links and when to just rely on the AI summary. If I'm searching a TV show by name, I'm generally just looking for an overview, the IMDb rating and a review of that show. If AI summary gets that wrong, it's not the end of the world. I don't bother doing…
i just use chat for everything now. if i need a link, ill ask it to provide one.
How can you stand how much slower that is?
For me the basic process means typing more, reading a needlessly verbose answer, and then half the time finding out it was wrong anyway.
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#47pangram flags this whole post as 100% AI generated fwiw (and it reads that way to me)
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#48There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. Searching in AI mode will mean your query is going to need to be a bit more pointed. The example given is you want evidence from an original source in Stack Overflow. So instead of just typing a few keywords and digging through pages, your query needs to ask Google exactly what you want and the format you want it in. If that’s a list of Sta…
> There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. That's ridiculous. There isn't a learning curve, we don't want AI . No amount of "learning" is going to make these misbegotten features into something that actually improves my experience with the product. You should listen to people, not assume that you know their desires better than they do.
i want ai
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#49Maybe it’s misplaced nostalgia but google search before google plus ruined the +, and the image search was top tier (not shopping ads) - truly incredible the signal to noise you could find. Now all the junk comes to the top and the sites you get all have ads and modal popups or sales funnel flows
Google was good. So everyone used it, so SEOs tried to optimize and then you get the junk.
Of course - it's SEO's fault that Google search frequently ignores words in your queries.
It's SEO's fault that Google frequently prioritizes giving you results that are semantically or thematically related but ultimately irrelevant to what you searched for.
It's SEO's fault that Google refuses to place ads on websites not full of meandering irrelevant "content".
It's SEO's fault Google search all-but-ignores most single-purpose tool websites.
It's not the result of decisions made by Google's programmers and project managers - it's allllll the fault of SEO!
The SEO industry definitely isn't an all-purpose scapegoat for horribly unpopular decisions made by human beings at Google.
Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you believe your comment adds to the discussion about this article?
I'd prefer more proof / context than GP gave, but I personally find it very useful to see people making judgements about AI-assistance of articles. Almost no such articles are worth my time, and the more HN people saying it, the more I know not to click past the HN headline.
Pangram agrees it's 100% LLM written.