71–80 of 164 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google search is on the way out. I don't know any of my peers who use it anymore. What do they use? Of all my tech friends, colleagues, I'm the only one who uses Kagi. Another person uses searx. Everyone else uses Google. Of my non-tech friends and colleagues, everyone uses Google.
Let me tell you about this new little-known technology that's been gaining traction in the last few years...
EU protects a database creator if there has been a qualitative or quantitative "substantial investment" in obtaining, verifying, or presenting the content, regardless of creative expression. In USA copyright requires a minimum degree of original creativity in the selection, coordination, or arrangement of the data. I think it's a rather grey line to say that Google search results are just facts, but eg maps are copyr…
> I think it's a rather grey line to say that Google search results are just facts, but eg maps are copyrightable. I don't think a map is a good example. A picture is probably a better one. A map, by its very definition, is not a replica of any part of the original artifact. Not merely because a map is not the territory, but also because it's not even a direct, unaltered view of the thing. There is clearly some creat…
[0] - I believe a specific case was Nintendo vs Prima publishing, which was even involving a map of a fictitious construct.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried both and it’s not even close which interface is better when it comes to answering a question. Google gives you stuff to sift through and interpret. AI just gives the answer. Imagine you’re in the car or hands free or disabled and you just want the question answered. https://ibb.co/whYmZWxs https://ibb.co/JFkQbmJf
The first of the two steps is a web search. The model didn’t answer from its trained weights.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried both and it’s not even close which interface is better when it comes to answering a question. Google gives you stuff to sift through and interpret. AI just gives the answer. Imagine you’re in the car or hands free or disabled and you just want the question answered. https://ibb.co/whYmZWxs https://ibb.co/JFkQbmJf
The first of the two steps is a web search. The model didn’t answer from its trained weights.
DMCA needs to be reformed one day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, go ahead and ask the LLM who won the 2026 World Cup. Or nearby BBQ places open now. Even assuming no hallucinations, an LLM can replace some use cases for search but not all.
Claude Sonnet 5 Medium more or less on the timestamp of the comment: Prompt: Who won the 2026 World Cup? Answer: Spain won the 2026 World Cup, beating Argentina 1-0 after extra time in the final at MetLife Stadium on July 19. Ferran Torres scored the only goal in the 106th minute, coming on as a substitute in the 62nd minute. It’s Spain’s second World Cup title, having also won in 2010. Prompt: Nearby BBQ places open…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"just gives you the answer" is a problem when it is offered without context, sourcing, etc. Such is the case for people trying to poison--ahem "influence" LLM results for "what is the best restaurant in $my_locale". You're playing a dangerous game.
> is a problem when it is offered without context, sourcing, etc. Sure. But that's not what's happening here, yeah? Both examples are providing sources. Actually I'd say that the LLM is doing a better job at that. You click a button and see 9 URLs to 9 news sites. I think for the "influence LLM results" fears, it would be ridiculous to argue about which multi-billion dollar American company can be trusted more not to…
Does it show relevant snippets for each of the 9 URLs? If not, then it's as bad as Google's AI summary. It's not that rare that the reference disagrees with the LLM.
The value of the non-LLM search engine is that in the search results, you see the relevant snippet, and if you want more information, you know quickly which links to click.
Not saying there's no place for the LLM for many search engine use cases, but a proper search engine replacement it is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting to imagine how the world would be different, if internet advertising giants were partially liable for scams/malware that they facilitate.
Imagine how world would be different if the actual scammers and malware creators would be prosecuted and not insteead demanded that internet giants play a privatized police force.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recall a articale I read "somewhere" that reported the Facebook makes big profit (Billions) from scams. So they have no ( or no strong motive) motive to shut such scams down An example is courtcase against Meta for using a Australians mining billionares likeness to promote a crypo investment scam. https://www.afr.com/technology/dad-it-s-a-fraud-call-that-sp...
This is actually illegal here in Sweden though. Lawsuits are ongoing. I'm kind of surprised that there haven't been criminal cases.
Where’s my nanometer-sized violin? Always losing that darn thing …