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

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Search

#791

Post by TechTalker3 »

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…

You're absolutely right: today's search engines and language models are limited by misaligned incentives. Ad-driven search engines prioritize content that is optimized for algorithms and ad revenue, often at the expense of depth and quality, while language models inherit these biases, which compromises their reliability.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#792

Post by arromatic »

umvi wrote: post #451
whizzter wrote: post #300

This is probably Google's Altavista moment, by making their results crappier by the year in search of Ad dollars everyone has felt that there is a potential for search to be better and once that becomes available they'll be in a continious game of catch-up. Yes, Google has their own AI divisions, tons of money and SEO is to blame for part of their crappiness. But they've also _explicitly_ focused on ad-dollars over a…

At some point it seems like Google switch to ML-based search instead of index based search. You can search for very specific combinations of lyrics and scenes: "eyes on me pineapple bucket of water house of cards chess time loop" and you won't surface a link to the music video featuring all of those things ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlzgDVLtU6g ), you'll just get really generic results of the average of your q…

How do ml based search and index based differ ? Can you elaborate more on this ?

Re: ChatGPT Search

#793

Post by randomNumber7 »

seydor wrote: post #268

I don't see a way for websites to monetize giving this content to openAI. This is not 2001 anymore, people should not expect to give away this information for nothing. I would be blocking openai bots ASAP

For me as a user this would be great. Then I would use openAI search and only get websites like those in 2001. Not the scam full with ads i have to wade through to find some usefull content.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#794

Post by maeil »

generalizations wrote: post #547
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm also cautiously optimistic though. We'll get there, but it's gonna be a bit shakey for a minute or two. But I don't understand how all of these AI results (note I haven't used Kagi so I don't know if it's different) don't fundamentally and irretrievably break the economics of the web. The "old deal" if you will is that many publishers would put stuff out on the web for free, but then with the hope that they cou…

> Why would anyone ever publish stuff on the web for free unless it was just a hobby That's exactly what the old deal was, and it's what made the old web so good. If every paid or ad-funded site died tomorrow, the web would be pretty much healed.

As if OpenAI won't end up offering paid access to influence these results, or advertise inside them. Of course they will, just like how Google started without ads.

It will be even more opaque and unblockable.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#796

Post by weberer »

DeathArrow wrote: post #724
GolfPopper wrote: post #602

Every time I see one of these topics, I go ask chat GPT a question to which I know the answer on a topic where I would like to be able to get useful answers to similar questions that I do not know the answer to. This time it was, "Did Paul Edwin Zimmer write a fourth Dark Border novel?" (Real answer: Yes, Ingulf the Mad . You can find the answer on his Wikipedia page.[1]) ChatGPT's[2] answer: "Yes, Paul Edwin Zimmer…

If AI produces a correct answer for something you know, there's no guarantee that it produces the correct answer for something you don't know. I'd rather find a way to verify that answer, if that answer has any importance.

Perplexity adds citations to the end of each statement. Its nice to be able to go to the primary source and verify whether its mixing anything up.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#797

Post by pattt »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #102
breck wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they are making billions from subscriptions, why on earth would they want to switch to an ads business?

Because it is never enough. We see this time and time again. Once they are making billions, the people in charge will demand that they start making dozens of billions, and then hundreds. The growth must never cease, because the moment you stop growing, you can't sell the dream that supports ridiculous PE ratios anymore. Google was a very profitable business 10 years ago and the search was still decent. In the last de…

If you consider complex forms of life serving as an entropy-increasing phenomenon, then you might as well consider that the evolutionary algorithm is governed by such goals. It's even plausible to take the human behaviors like increasing consumerism and growth-orientation as being connected to this fundamental thermodynamic drive. Perhaps we'll find even more efficient principles to drive our consumption further.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#798

Post by palla89 »

I tried asking him something really new and specific, like the best talent builds (that are user created) for the latest patch of World of Warcraft without specifying which version it was, and answer was really really accurate. No hallucination at all!

Re: ChatGPT Search

#799

Post by maeil »

KoftaBob wrote: post #751
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm also cautiously optimistic though. We'll get there, but it's gonna be a bit shakey for a minute or two. But I don't understand how all of these AI results (note I haven't used Kagi so I don't know if it's different) don't fundamentally and irretrievably break the economics of the web. The "old deal" if you will is that many publishers would put stuff out on the web for free, but then with the hope that they cou…

That's why you're seeing media companies making deals with companies like OpenAI to allow them to access their content for AI learning/parsing purposes, in exchange for the media company getting paid yearly royalties. Since anyone creating content (whether that's a big media corp or a small cooking blog) holds copyright over their content, they get to withhold the permission to scrape their content unless these AI pl…

By the same logic they'd get to sue over the scraping done to originally train the models. If royalties need to be paid for additional use, they would've needed to be paid for the original use.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#800

Post by NotMichaelBay »

psychoslave wrote: post #326
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…

What do you mean with "when it starts"? To my mind it's obvious all LLM are heavily biased to a point it's ridiculous, all the more with the confident tone they are trained to take. I have no doubt Chinese LLM will prise the party as much as American ones will sing the gospel of neoliberal capitalism.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Some examples would help your argument.
Post reply on HN