Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

chuckwnelson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 504 posts

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

#381

Post by BoorishBears »

jvanderbot wrote: post #366
nox101 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have tried the same, and had ChatGPT utterly fail. > me: what's the relatively recent movie with a pig on the movie poster > gpt: The movie you're referring to is likely "Pig," a 2021 American drama film. It stars Nicolas Cage as a truffle hunter who lives alone in the Oregon wilderness. He embarks on a quest to find his beloved foraging pig after she is kidnapped. The film was directed by Michael Sarnoski . > me:…

Inb4 we all tell you you're using it wrong. There are certainly better ways to do this, but this is really the major thing that drives me nuts. No matter how many times I tell some LLM I want it to ask clarifying questions to provide better answers, it just won't. You end up doing exactly this, guessing what information might trigger the right recall.

> No matter how many times I tell some LLM I want it to ask clarifying questions to provide better answers, it just won't

You're telling me there's a modern frontier model that refused to ask clarifying questions after you told it to?

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

#382

Post by marginalia_nu »

> When Google came onto the scene, I credit its success to the tried and true paradigm that makes companies successful: simple and easy to use.

If Google's competitive advantage was only that they had a clean and simple web page, I don't think they'd have nearly the sticking power they ended up having. You can design a front-end that looks like Google's original UI in a matter of hours.

It seems implausible tale that in the 25 years since their ascendance, nobody has tried to compete with them with a simple-looking search box.

Google became dominant because Google was much better than the alternatives.

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

#383

Post by BoorishBears »

nox101 wrote: post #362
Lewton wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A week ago, I was looking for the name of a semi obscure late 90ies computer game. Google could not help me given the description i gave Described it to ChatGPT, and we had a back and forth where I explained why the games it suggested me weren’t right, it eventually found the correct game (Nocturne) and was able to explain to me that half of the things I remembered from the game were just plain wrong, and that’s why…

I have tried the same, and had ChatGPT utterly fail. > me: what's the relatively recent movie with a pig on the movie poster > gpt: The movie you're referring to is likely "Pig," a 2021 American drama film. It stars Nicolas Cage as a truffle hunter who lives alone in the Oregon wilderness. He embarks on a quest to find his beloved foraging pig after she is kidnapped. The film was directed by Michael Sarnoski . > me:…

The recent web search integration actually made ChatGPT much worse at this specific kind of search (I want a piece of media, but I only remember characteristics of it)

If you explicitly tell it not to search, it's less likely to anchor itself in trying to search the web and going down rabbit holes.

It also more likely to pause at times and ask the right questions to nudge.

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

#384

Post by phil21 »

Lewton wrote: post #340
potsandpans wrote: post #42

Just sharing an anecdote: I was searching for a quote that I'd heard in an audiobook the other day. I just had the general paraphrase, and didn't feel like scanning through the chapters to go find it. This was a somewhat obscure source. Google had just straight garbage for me. The quote was political in nature, and I felt like the results were fighting general tone-policing filters and were tuned for recent events. o…

A week ago, I was looking for the name of a semi obscure late 90ies computer game. Google could not help me given the description i gave Described it to ChatGPT, and we had a back and forth where I explained why the games it suggested me weren’t right, it eventually found the correct game (Nocturne) and was able to explain to me that half of the things I remembered from the game were just plain wrong, and that’s why…

This is great, never thought to use ChatGPT for this use. I have been trying to remember a game from extremely early memories where I was able to play it for a single weekend at an uncle's house in my youth when my parents were out of town.

Bugged me on and off for the better part of a decade and I couldn't figure it out from describing it to google - the only thing I knew for sure were a few graphical UI screens seared into my brain, the rest was far too generic to really narrow things down.

In the end ChatGPT got it correct in the first try from a minimal description, confirmed by watching a youtube playthrough and the memories coming back immediately.

Masters of Orion if anyone was curious :)

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

#385

Post by tensor »

bambax wrote: post #45

> Does ChatGPT Search have trust? Open AI isn't monetizing its search just yet, but AI has its own issues with hallucinations. Everywhere where SEO people congregate, they talk only about this: how to produce content that will eventually end up in training data for LLMs, so that when you ask about anything remotely connected to a given brand, its products will show up in the response. Ads are bad enough today, but it…

This is why there will be a market for personal LLMs that act as your agent, or maybe shared for a family or the like.

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

#386

Post by BiteCode_dev »

sumedh wrote: post #356
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #73

Once timeless facts will be solidified in AI training, like historical dates, laws of physics, maths formulas or specific programming API, there will be no reason to search for these things using Google. The web battle will then happen on this moving quickly, like the news. This will give immensely more power to the medias, and I fear that a lot given they have demonstrated time and again they can't be trusted with i…

> Once timeless facts will be solidified in AI training Who decides those are facts? What if someone comes up with alternative facts?

I don't think you'll find a lot of people fighting about newtons gravity equations, the year of the French revolution or the fundamentals about steam engines.

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

#387

Post by tensor »

bambax wrote: post #135
falcor84 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of that awesome analysis of all the speech of a diplomat's visit in Asimov's original Foundation book: > Hardin threw himself back in the chair. “You know, that's the most interesting part of the whole business. I admit that I thought his Lordship a most consummate donkey when I first met him – but it turned out that he is an accomplished diplomat and a most clever man. I took the liberty of recording…

What will happen is that when you ask the AI to summarize a book to remove the fluff, it will inject random mentions of how the main character decided to drink a Coke. Let's go with truly open models! you say. That way we can be sure there are no shoddy behind-the-scenes deal going on between the model provider and some company or government. But the ads are in the training data , they are part of the fabric of the w…

Actually, training it yourself is probably better in terms of copyright. If you train an LLM that only you use, from books you own, I don't see how that is actually illegal. As long as you're not selling the LLM or content it generates is there any legal issue?

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

#389

Post by AnthonyMouse »

jerf wrote: post #211

Don't bet on AI staying clean. A lot of HN readers conceptualize the forces attacking the integrity of the search results as just some isolated people taking occasional potshots, and then maybe slinking away if their trick gets blocked. It is probably a lot more accurate to visualize the SEO industry as a Dark Google. Roughly as well resourced, with many smart people working on it full time, day in, day out, with inf…

> And if Dark Google has not yet figured out how to scam AI... it is only a matter of time.

There is one thing the AI companies have going for them that Google doesn't: They don't have 90% market share.

That's a huge problem that only Google has, because if your black hat SEO stops working against Google, you dedicate all your efforts to fixing it until it does, and then Google has to win against the combined efforts of everyone in the world.

Now suppose there were a dozen search engines that all had around equal market share. You find something that works against the first one but that causes you to get dropped to page 10 by two of the other ones. You finally find something that works against three quarters of them... for a week... after which it still works against a third of them but doing that causes the other two thirds to drop you again. To have any chance with those now you have to stop doing that, but if you do you fall off the front page for the third it was still working against. Also, by the end of the month that third will be a quarter.

You could target only one specific search engine, but then you're doing the same amount of work for only 8% of the advantage, meanwhile that search engine can concentrate their efforts on thwarting the similarly smaller percentage of black hat SEOs who chose to target them instead of one of the competing search engines.

It's much harder to hit a dozen moving targets at once than just one.

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

#390

Post by hinkley »

layer8 wrote: post #358
hinkley wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’re aiming to lose weight safely the rule of thumb is 3 lbs a week. 3000kcal per pound works out to an average deficit of about 1280 calories per day. Max. Obese people can lose a bit more under doctor supervision. My understanding is that it’s tied partially to % of body weight lost per week and partly to what your organs can process, which does not increase with body mass.

I don’t think absolute numbers are very useful here. You need around 5–10% reduction in calorie intake to get any weight-loss effect going, and I wouldn’t reduce by more than 20% (relative to weight-maintaining intake — it’s different if you’ve been seriously overeating) if you want it to be sustainable longer-term. So for example if your weight is stable at 2500 kcal per day, I would start by reducing the intake by…

Your body will get more efficient at whatever exercise you do to make the calories work out. So over time you’ll either have to increase your exercise or rein in the calories a bit more to achieve a sustained result.
Post reply on HN