Live data from Hacker News

I don't want my search engine to think for me

searchzee.com

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#51

I love AI summary and AI mode in Google search. I think it should be up to you (the human) to use your judgement to decide when to do further research by following the links and when to just rely on the AI summary. If I'm searching a TV show by name, I'm generally just looking for an overview, the IMDb rating and a review of that show. If AI summary gets that wrong, it's not the end of the world. I don't bother doing…

Absolutely this.

I left google for chagpt/claude, but have slowly been coming back because these results have become rather useful -- especially when google inspects actual video content to produce replies. This is one of the best outcomes of the AI wave for me: content which was locked away in YouTube videos and forced me to consume it sequentially (without power-reading as I do with articles) is now indexed in search results in some AI summary. It makes mistakes, but it lets me figure out the right videos to watch, and often gives me enough context to find the solution myself. This applies to work, but also to something as simple as game walkthroughs!

As with everything, you need to know when to trust and when to doubt, when to iterate on chat (or chat with it with a smarter assistant like ChatGPT/claude). Hasn't it always been this way (minus the chat)?

I don't understand why people seem to be under this idea that just because it's at the top of a search results page it must be entirely correct, when we have spent decades knowing that you can't trust what's on the internet and you need to have critical thinking. Were you blindly trusting your first-page google results? What about when Wikipedia was starting, were you also trusting it blindly? Do you trust it blindly now?

In fact, when google started stealing the content of websites to display it, wasn't it already producing largely incorrect results because so many hits were SEO-garbage or outdated? (Not that we don't need to address the fact that this steals traffic from websites -- but it's a problem that PREDATES AI and absolutely still needs to be addressed somehow)

I can understand it if they believe the average joe will be more likely to blindly trust this, but that's an education problem -- and one we already had and has perhaps been compounded.

The visceral hate for a a life-changing technology that enables us to do more, faster, never ceases to amaze me. I'm growing so tired of it around my inner circles.

I get that there is a real bubble with real overhype and that some companies are profiting from it and shoving it down everyone's throats. I get that your actual life is worse because of this (you are forced to use shit models to produce more features while being paid the same). I get that maybe your job might change, and that for some people they will actually need to job-hop. This all absolutely sucks and it is a problem for many people, I get that! But that doesn't make the technology as a whole terrible, much less a bunch of its amazing applications. It's this constant wave of negativity, like nothing good will ever come out of AI and we're all doomed to be cornered by the big evil corporations that will run us dry.

It's hard to be rational when you're overcome with emotion and fear, I know, but it's so aggravating to have to interact with someone who can only see the technology itself as negative.

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#52
post #36

There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. Searching in AI mode will mean your query is going to need to be a bit more pointed. The example given is you want evidence from an original source in Stack Overflow. So instead of just typing a few keywords and digging through pages, your query needs to ask Google exactly what you want and the format you want it in. If that’s a list of Sta…

No, those search engines will simply stop being used by people that care. Google's "AI results" have already wrongly accused people of being sex offenders and make up gibberish constantly. They are a blight and a scourge. There are already many lawsuits against the garbage it invents. The "quality" of your prompt is irrelevant when you're feeding it to something that just imagines things.

As he said, its just a learning curve and you are behind on it. Dont use AI mode use perplexity or gpt for your search. its far superior to traditional search, just slower. The quality of your prompt also matters. Im pretty annoyed by those like you who hide and mask their ignorance behind anything they can grasp to cover themselves. It's transparent to most but yourself. Ignorance i could forgive, but not the dishonesty.

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#53
post #43

There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. Searching in AI mode will mean your query is going to need to be a bit more pointed. The example given is you want evidence from an original source in Stack Overflow. So instead of just typing a few keywords and digging through pages, your query needs to ask Google exactly what you want and the format you want it in. If that’s a list of Sta…

In other words, for the primary uses of search things have gotten much worse, but some workarounds still exist.

ill take ai search over blog and seo-infused search any day

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#54

There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. Searching in AI mode will mean your query is going to need to be a bit more pointed. The example given is you want evidence from an original source in Stack Overflow. So instead of just typing a few keywords and digging through pages, your query needs to ask Google exactly what you want and the format you want it in. If that’s a list of Sta…

> There will be a learning curve for some, like the person behind this article. That's ridiculous. There isn't a learning curve, we don't want AI . No amount of "learning" is going to make these misbegotten features into something that actually improves my experience with the product. You should listen to people, not assume that you know their desires better than they do.

Why dont you want AI?

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#57
Your search engine doesn't think for you. It never did. It still doesn't, even with AI summaries. What it does do, is summarize information.

It's up to you, the human, to decide what path you get the information and how to digest it and use it. I use LLMs for 99% of my "querying" these days because 99% of the information I'm looking for is either verifiable (coding) or low-stakes (how to do low-risk DIY house thing).

If I need actual search, I use Kagi. Otherwise, Claude has taken 99.8% of what Google used to do for me and it feels better than ever.

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#59
post #8
post #4

LLM-written article.

What do you believe your comment adds to the discussion about this article?

Same as a NSFW tag. It's not about adding to the discussion; it's a very brief warning to users who don't want to see that kind of content, and its brevity makes it come at almost no cost to users who don't care about SFW/NSFW or AI/OC distinctions.

Re: I don't want my search engine to think for me

#60
post #55

You know, I've been investing in reference books since Google started failing to accurately report basic equations and constants. It's kinda nice actually.

1970 called

Hey my encyclopedia had yearly updates through 2008!! :D

But seriously, its actually nicer... and the equations on the back covers don't randomly change to crap every fourth time you open the book.

Post reply on HN