[deleted]
Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
231–240 of 378 posts
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
At my company we have a live service chat feature. Recently some of our customers have been requesting an AI chatbot support (we've got fairly technical product offerings). I'm guessing they want to ask a bunch of stupid questions. I'm surprised as well. Some people want it
the only reasons i can imagine that a customer would want to use an AI chatbot for support instead of chatting with a person is either because they don't currently have the option to chat with a person 24/7 at all (AI is better than no chat support), or their experience with human chat support has been terrible (long wait times, slow responses, unhelpful agents, annoying language barriers, responses so unnatural and…
I dunno. Sarah Connor explained it pretty nicely in the 90s
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tksN5Jaan9E
Kinda on the nose
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#233Every time some product or service introduces AI (or more accurately shoves it down our throats) people start looking for a way to get rid of it. It's so strange how much money and time companies are pouring into "features" that the public continues to reject at every opportunity. At this point I'm convinced that the endless AI hype and all the investment is purely due to hopes that it will soon put vast numbers of e…
I am totally in the same boat but also I do suspect it is a minority. It’s the same way that some people really want open source bootloaders, but 99.99% of people do not care at all. Maybe AI assistants in random places just aren’t that compatible with people on HN but are possibly useful for a lot of people not on HN?
I don't think so. I have many nontechnical friends who are furious at having to deal with bad AI, whether it's a stupid chatbot that they have to talk to instead of a real person or Google "AI overviews" that often get things completely wrong.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#234[deleted]
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not strange. It's about power and control. Google and the other big names could care less about user satisfaction: their customers are the ad buyers. It's too bad because even 10 years ago Google and the internet in general were magical. You could find information on any topic, make connections and change your life. Now it is mostly santized dumbed down crap and the discovery of anything special is hidden under…
Almost makes me think curated TV will come back, even if all streamed. Real humans with reputations, and ensuring no fakery. And a vast decline in youtube.
That's every streaming service right now. Netflix hides all kinds of things they have on offer from you because they've already decided what they want you to watch and they'll push it at you over and over again while keeping other content hidden unless you explicitly search for it.
We have curated TV now, but just like before the people doing the curation aren't doing it based on what's good for you, the viewer. It's based on what will benefit their bottom line.
The things we try to resort to in order to figure out what to spend our time watching like review sites and social media are already gamed and astroturfed to death. Each new one that comes out gets less useful as time goes on because of it.
Good luck finding the real humans online among the countless AI generated curators PR firms churn out.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At this point I'm convinced that the endless AI hype and all the investment is purely due to hopes that it will soon put vast amounts of employees out of work It's this part. Salaries and benefits are expensive. A computer program doesn't need a salary, retirement benefits, insurance, retirement, doesn't call in sick, doesn't take vacations, works 24/7, etc.
It's interesting how we can frame "potentially automating tasks" in the most sinister conceivable way. The same argument applies to essentially all technology, like a computer.
> The same argument applies to essentially all technology, like a computer.
Why yes, it does.
Even setting aside that most AI hype: Yes, automation is in fact quite sinister if you do not go out of your way to deal with the downsides. Putting people out of a job is bad, actually.
Yes. The industrial revolution was a great boon to humanity that drastically improved quality of living and wealth. It also created horrific torment nexuses like mechanical looms into which we sent small children to get maimed.
And we absolutely could've had the former without the latter; Child labour laws handily proved it was possible, and should have been implemented far sooner.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with this. I'm very surprised when I see someone blindly trust whatever the AI summary says in a google query, because I myself have internalized a long time ago to strongly distrust it.
I’ve seen quite a few posts on Reddit with people asking questions like “Is a Mazda 2 really faster than a Civic Type R?!? ChatGPT told me it is” and it’s some complete nonsense numbers that could’ve been fact checked in about 5 seconds. I don’t think the little “ChatGPT might be wrong, you should check” disclaimer is doing very much.
It's a good sign that people are even going to reddit and asking for confirmation of something that seemed suspicious to them. Sure, many of them could have googled for those answers themselves, but part of the problem is how unreliable and dishonest Google has become.
Reddit sure isn't an ideal place for fact checks. It's full of PR bots and shills, but at least there are still humans commenting and I can't fault people for doing what they can in the best way they know how.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#238Every time some product or service introduces AI (or more accurately shoves it down our throats) people start looking for a way to get rid of it. It's so strange how much money and time companies are pouring into "features" that the public continues to reject at every opportunity. At this point I'm convinced that the endless AI hype and all the investment is purely due to hopes that it will soon put vast numbers of e…
What choice does Google have? Google search is such a shit show now that I use ChatGPT to do any complicated web search. The paid version has had web search for over two years now.
Google couldn’t just keep ignoring it. I do wish it were an option instead of on by default - except for searches they can monetize
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#239Every time some product or service introduces AI (or more accurately shoves it down our throats) people start looking for a way to get rid of it. It's so strange how much money and time companies are pouring into "features" that the public continues to reject at every opportunity. At this point I'm convinced that the endless AI hype and all the investment is purely due to hopes that it will soon put vast numbers of e…
Marc Andreessen stated on twitter that was a core reason for why he likes AI, to drive down wages (which in his words "must crash").
So you are not far off from that concept of putting vast numbers of employees out of work, when influential figures like Andressen are openly stating that is their ambitions.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
At my company we have a live service chat feature. Recently some of our customers have been requesting an AI chatbot support (we've got fairly technical product offerings). I'm guessing they want to ask a bunch of stupid questions. I'm surprised as well. Some people want it
the only reasons i can imagine that a customer would want to use an AI chatbot for support instead of chatting with a person is either because they don't currently have the option to chat with a person 24/7 at all (AI is better than no chat support), or their experience with human chat support has been terrible (long wait times, slow responses, unhelpful agents, annoying language barriers, responses so unnatural and…
I agree, although "competent human" is not really the bar when we're talking about actually existing phone support. A while back I was trying to solve an issue with Verizon and calling three separate times I got three completely different approaches to solving my problem, all three of which were totally incorrect. (And the correct solution was literally just "go to this URL and fill out a form".) At least one of those people gave me advice that would have put me in legal hot water. It was rough.