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

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Search

#221

Post by pradn »

101008 wrote: post #156

Search in the internet worked because people wanted to generate content to attract people to display ads or any other reason, but they wanted to attract people. If now my content is going to be ingested and shown by a LLM or AI agent, what's the purpose to give it for free? I know it won't happen, but I would love if this type of agents have to pay to show a summarization of another website. It's only fair when done…

Well the whole point of this product is to link back to websites. There’s no necessary link between the text and the links, which are chosen after the fact from an index. That’s different from traditional search engines, where links are directly retrieved from the index as part of ranking.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#222

Post by itissid »

There should(or will probably be) be a study on how long do people take on google etc vs search powered by chatgpt to get non-trivial work done, controlling for obvious factors like age, gender, country and industry

If there is a bias towards chatgpt like tools of even ~5%, it would be worth investigating why this is. My hunch is just the conversational aspect of describing at a high level and finding answers and avoiding all the distraction of several dozen windows to do something is worth it.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#224

Post by keiferski »

currymj wrote: post #204
keiferski wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perplexity is a really terrible name for a product and that alone will hold it back from being a real competitor.

A good language model is one with low perplexity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perplexity Reasonable name for a language model startup.

It would be a logical name if its customers were technicians familiar with LLMs, and not end businesses and consumers. Which is why Ford wasn't named Internal Combustion Engine, Apple wasn't named Graphics Processing Unit, etc.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#225

Post by vel0city »

tempusalaria wrote: post #192
spunker540 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s pretty clear that LLMs can process a document/article/web page faster than any human in order to answer a given question. (And it can be parallelized across multiple pages at once too). The main hard part of searching isn’t formulating queries to write in the Google search bar, it’s clicking on links, and reading/skimming until you find the specific answer you want. Getting one sentence direct answers is…

Only if it is reliably correct. Google does offer an AI summary for factual searches and I ignore it as it often hallucinates. Perplexity has the same problem. OpenAI would need to solve that for this to be truly useful

This is why my most used LLM after code suggestions is Bing. I like that it has lots of references for the things I ask it to double check and read more, but at the same time it can help me dig deeper into a subject rapidly and better formulate the exact question I'm trying to ask and give me a link to the actual data it's getting it's info from.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#226

Post by niam »

carabiner wrote: post #186
niam wrote: post #142

Genuine question: is there a present or planned value proposition for people like me who already have decent search skills? Or are these really for children/elders who (without making any normative claim about whether this is a good thing or not) can't be arsed to perform searches themselves? Does someone else have good search skills but mingle traditional search engines with LLMs anyways? Why? I use LLMs every day b…

> Genuine question... When it starts with this you KNOW it's going to be maximum bad faith horsefuckery in the rest of the "question."

I know what you mean, but also don't know how it applies here. Not a hater, and not asking rhetorically to dunk on OpenAI. Just haven't found a use for this particular feature.

Which is also exactly something a bad-faith commenter would say, but if I lose either way, I'd rather just ask the question ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Re: ChatGPT Search

#227

Post by skydhash »

blixt wrote: post #108

One thing that is quite unfortunate with the state of SEO and the web in general today is that when I asked "what are the latest versions of common programming languages and when were they released?" a large amount of the sources were "13 Tools You Should Learn Now" and the like. This might be a solvable problem within the search API they provide to the LLM, but for now I wouldn't trust current LLMs to be able to fil…

> when I asked "what are the latest versions of common programming languages and when were they released?"

The issue is with the query itself. You're assuming that there's some oracle that will understand your question and surface the relevant information for you. Most likely, it will use the word themselves as part of the query, which SEO sites will exploit.

A more pragmatic search workflow would be to just search for "most common programming languages used" [0], then used the Wikipedia page to get the relevant information [1]. Much more legwork, but with sources. And still quite fast.

[0]: (Screenshot) https://ibb.co/ggBLy8G

[1]: (Screenshot) https://ibb.co/H4g5bDf

Post reply on HN