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

441–450 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Search

#441

Post by jazzyjackson »

whiplash451 wrote: post #435
wvenable wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will this fundamentally change how people find and access information? How do you create an experience so compelling that it replaces the current paradigm? I think it's already compelling enough to replace the current paradigm. Search is pretty much dead to me. I have to end every search with "reddit" to get remotely useful results. The concern I have with LLMs replacing search is that once it starts being monetize…

For what it’s worth, sama said at a Harvard event recently that he “despised” ads and would use them at a last resort. It came across as genuine and I have the intuition/hope that they might find an alternative.

Everyone despises ads until other revenue streams run dry

Re: ChatGPT Search

#442

Post by dumpsterdiver »

freediver wrote: post #241

Been thinking about this a lot [1]. Will this fundamentally change how people find and access information? How do you create an experience so compelling that it replaces the current paradigm? The future promised in Star Trek and even Apple's Knowledge Navigator [2] from 1987 still feels distant. In those visions, users simply asked questions and received reliable answers - nobody had to fact-check the answers ever. C…

> nobody had to fact-check the answers ever

Even with perfect knowledge right now, there’s no guarantee that knowledge will remain relevant when it reaches another person at the fastest speed knowledge is able to travel. A reasonable answer on one side of the universe could be seen as nonsensical on the other side - for instance, the belief that we might one day populate a planet which no longer exists.

As soon as you leave the local reference frame (the area in a system from which observable events can realistically be considered happening “right now”), fact checking is indeed required.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#443

Post by lux »

jayanth-vijay wrote: post #154

Is there a new api model version for search available ?

Indeed. Search was working reliably for me for a while using gpt-4o via the API then yesterday suddenly stopped altogether right when I needed it. Hoping this fixes it soon.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#444

Post by 101008 »

amiantos wrote: post #319
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…

I publish my content "for free" because I want to spread knowledge and information, or promote a topic or interest I enjoy, and monetization has never been a priority for me. I know that I am not alone. The urge to create does not depend on a need for money. I am happy for my websites to be picked up by Perplexity or ChatGPT because I want more people to see/learn/hear about the things I care about. If someone only c…

I said "or any other reasons" because I was in a hurry. Internet existed way before ads, I agree, but even then you wanted people to visit your site to see what you wrote. Maybe to become an expert in a topic, maybe to feel better, but you want people to know who did it. That's why websites used to have a webmaster and info about that particular person.

If people stop visiting websites because LLM give them what they want, websites will stop existing. Don't believe me? Check how many "fansites" exist now about topics compared to ten years ago, when there weren't social networks. They have been replaced by influecners with huge followers on Instagram, TikTok, Twitter and more. The same will happen.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#445

Post by tomjen3 »

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…

I have used Perplexity (and AI search company) a lot and - well I don't think you understand. This is not about it being too difficult to find the information. Its that a search in Google will give you a list of places to go that are relevant to your query. AI search will give you the information you want.

This becomes even better if the information you want is in multiple different places. The canonical question for that used to be "what was the phase of the moon when John Lennon was shot?". There didn't used to be an answer to this in Google - but the AI search was able to break it down, find the date John Lennon was shot (easily available on Google), find the moon phase on that day (again, easily available on Google) and put them together to produce the new answer.

For a more tech relevant example, "what is the smallest AWS EC2 I can run a Tomcat server in?

You 100% can get this information yourself. It just much more time than having an AI do it.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#446

Post by tomjen3 »

Xcelerate wrote: post #12

How long until advertisements are subtly introduced? I didn’t notice any specific brand of limoncello recommended in their demo.

It is much more expensive to run a search query with AI. I don't think ads can pay for it.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#447

Post by kensai »

Meanwhile at Google HQ: I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced…

Re: ChatGPT Search

#448

Post by astrange »

carls wrote: post #398
throwaway314155 wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if one is to believe the reports of their internal politics I'm not familiar with what you're referring to here. Happen to have a link?

There are probably several, but one of the ones that made the rounds a while ago is "The Man Who Killed Google Search" by Edward Zitron: https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-men-who-killed-google/

Prabhakar Raghavan got fired (= promoted out of the job) last week.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#449

Post by hadlock »

freediver wrote: post #241

Been thinking about this a lot [1]. Will this fundamentally change how people find and access information? How do you create an experience so compelling that it replaces the current paradigm? The future promised in Star Trek and even Apple's Knowledge Navigator [2] from 1987 still feels distant. In those visions, users simply asked questions and received reliable answers - nobody had to fact-check the answers ever. C…

I've been using ChatGPT for about 6 weeks as my go-to for small questions (when is sunset in sf today? list currencies that start with the letter P, convert this timestamp PDT to GMT, when is the end of Q1 2025?) and it's been great/99% accurate. If there was ever a "google killer" I think it's the ad free version of ChatGPT with better web search.

Google started off with just web search, but now you can get unit conversions and math and stuff. ChatGPT started in the other direction and is moving to envelope search. Not being directed to sites that also majority serve google ads is a double benefit. I'll gladly pay $20/30/mo for an ad free experience, particularly if it improves 2x in quality over the next year or two. It's starting to feel like a feature complete product already.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#450

Post by carlosjobim »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #321
cmiles74 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like hyperbole to me. People can reasonably expect Wikipedia to have factual data even though it sometimes contains inaccuracies. Likewise if people are using ChatGPT for search it should be somewhat reliable. If I'm asking ChatGPT to put an itinerary together for a trip (OpenAI's suggestion, not mine), my expectation is that places on that itinerary exist. I can forgive them being closed or even out of bu…

> People can reasonably expect Wikipedia to have factual data even though it sometimes contains inaccuracies. I just straight-up don't agree with this, nor with the idea that what people consider "facts" are nearly as reliable as is implied. What we actually refer to via "fact" is "consensus". Truth is an apriori concept whereas we're discussing posteriori claims. Any "reasonable" ai would give an indication of degre…

For those not in the know, the Soviet Union was an officially atheist empire and explicitly anti religious, foremost anti christian. I don't know if the poster above me is denying this or if he/she considers it general knowledge which needn't be mentioned.
Post reply on HN