Live data from Hacker News

Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

chuckwnelson.com

151–160 of 504 posts

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#151
post #7

> Enter 2024 with AI. The top 20% of search results are a wall of text from AI... I'll be the contrarian here and say I actually like Google's AI Overview? For the first time in a long time, I can search for an answer to a question and, instead of getting annoying ads and SEO-optimized uselessness, I actually get an answer. Google is finally useful again. That said, once Google screws with this and starts making sear…

[deleted]

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#152
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either I’m monetizing my site and I care about traffic or why else would I care if people visit my site as long as information gets out there?

If I had a site (no time lately to maintain one) it would be because I wanted to inform people and contribute to the world’s accessible knowledge. I would want my information presented in context, accurately, the way I intended, not digested and reworded (often inaccurately) by Google.

And how likely is someone to find your site through search instead of word of mouth?

I bet you if you had insightful posts on HN (not saying you don’t) and people knew you, you would get more traffic by putting a link in your profile here than people searching on Google.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm my search returns “between 150 to 200 mg per kilogram”, which is maybe more correct? Also, in what context is this dangerous? To reach dangerous levels one would have to drink well over 100 cups of coffee in a sitting, something remarkably hard to do.

> Also, in what context is this dangerous? To reach dangerous levels one would have to drink well over 100 cups of coffee in a sitting some people use caffeine powder / pills for gym stuff apparently. someone overdosed and died after incorrectly weighing a bunch of powder. doubt it is a big leap to someone dying because they were told the wrong limits by google. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-60570470 as ever, m…

I don't doubt the news article on this, but even with caffeine pills/powder it's near half a fistful to get to LD50 judging by my caffeine tablets. It's not impossible to consume, but it'd be distinctly unpleasant long before you get even anywhere close to dangerous levels.

For my high-caffeine pre-workout powder, I suspect I'd vomit long before I'd get anywhere near. Pure caffeine is less unpleasant, but still pretty awful, which I guess is why we don't see more deaths from it despite the widespread use.

I agree with you that there really ought to be caution around giving advice on safety-critical things, but this one really is right up there in freak accident territory, in the intersection of somewhat dangerous substances sold in a poorly regulated form (e.g. there's little reason for these to be sold as bulk powders instead of pressed into pills other than making people feel more macho downing awful tasting drinks instead of taking pills).

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#154
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be great if it wasn't completely wrong 50% of the time.

Describes my general experience with AI across the board. Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, etc. It’s like I’m talking to a genius toddler. With ChatGPT losing 5 billion dollars on 3.7B in revenue this is unsustainable. It feels like the dotcom bubble all over again.

> genius toddler

I think it's closer to a well spoken idiot.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, in what context is this dangerous? To reach dangerous levels one would have to drink well over 100 cups of coffee in a sitting some people use caffeine powder / pills for gym stuff apparently. someone overdosed and died after incorrectly weighing a bunch of powder. doubt it is a big leap to someone dying because they were told the wrong limits by google. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-60570470 as ever, m…

> some people use caffeine powder / pills for gym stuff apparently. At 200mg per pill, which is the strongest I had, I'd still have to down some 70+ pills in one go. Not strictly impossible, but not something you could possibly do by accident, and even for the purpose of early check-out, it wouldn't be my first choice.

the problem isn’t someone’s intent (on purpose/by accident).

it’s intent (want to improve my gym performance so down a bunch of caffeine) combined with incorrect information gained from what is supposedly a trustworthy source (the limit presented is much higher than it actually is for humans).

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either I’m monetizing my site and I care about traffic or why else would I care if people visit my site as long as information gets out there?

I've had numerous people contact me directly with follow up questions about various info I've put on my website. Many of those have turned into further conversations and collaborations. You can't have that if Google is plagiarizing your site and delivering the info.

How many of those people found you by randomly searching Google versus via links via your profile on social media?

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#157
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be great if it wasn't completely wrong 50% of the time.

Compared to 0% of relevant results in first 10 pages it's an enormous improvement.

Have you seen an example where the AI hits on something that isn't in the first 10 pages of results?

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm my search returns “between 150 to 200 mg per kilogram”, which is maybe more correct? Also, in what context is this dangerous? To reach dangerous levels one would have to drink well over 100 cups of coffee in a sitting, something remarkably hard to do.

> Also, in what context is this dangerous? To reach dangerous levels one would have to drink well over 100 cups of coffee in a sitting some people use caffeine powder / pills for gym stuff apparently. someone overdosed and died after incorrectly weighing a bunch of powder. doubt it is a big leap to someone dying because they were told the wrong limits by google. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-60570470 as ever, m…

Your example doesn't interact with the chicken littling in this thread.

> The hearing was told the scales Mr Mansfield had used to measure the powder had a weighing range from two to 5,000 grams, whereas he was attempting to weigh a recommended dose of 60-300mg.

Nothing to do with an LLM nor with someone not knowing the exact LD50 of caffeine. Just "this article contains someone dying of caffeine overdose, and we're talking about caffeine overdose here, therefore LLM is dangerous."

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#159
post #7

> Enter 2024 with AI. The top 20% of search results are a wall of text from AI... I'll be the contrarian here and say I actually like Google's AI Overview? For the first time in a long time, I can search for an answer to a question and, instead of getting annoying ads and SEO-optimized uselessness, I actually get an answer. Google is finally useful again. That said, once Google screws with this and starts making sear…

Google search had gotten so bad the AI overview is passable in comparison. They don't deserve credit for that! Search was better at getting useful information fifteen years ago than it does now. (And yes, the internet is way more full of garbage now--but they did that, they are responsible for that too!)

... unless you want anything like a perspective or an opinion on something, instead of a factual answer to a question, in which case it's totally useless.

Re: Google's Results Are Infested, Open AI Is Using Their Playbook from the 2000s

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, in what context is this dangerous? To reach dangerous levels one would have to drink well over 100 cups of coffee in a sitting some people use caffeine powder / pills for gym stuff apparently. someone overdosed and died after incorrectly weighing a bunch of powder. doubt it is a big leap to someone dying because they were told the wrong limits by google. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-60570470 as ever, m…

> some people use caffeine powder / pills for gym stuff apparently. At 200mg per pill, which is the strongest I had, I'd still have to down some 70+ pills in one go. Not strictly impossible, but not something you could possibly do by accident, and even for the purpose of early check-out, it wouldn't be my first choice.

An accident with it in powdered form is possible - people who use them are often used to pre-workout supplements tasting awful, and so might be prepared to down it as fast as possible - but it's a big enough volume of powder that it really is a freak accident.

And if on purpose, using caffeine would just be staggeringly awful...

Post reply on HN