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

811–820 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Search

#811

Post by pikseladam »

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…

how many times people clicked a spam ad instead of real website in google? if you want to compare, then do it to all of them.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#813

Post by liveoneggs »

I like that they used the example of a travel agent.

I used ChatGPT for planning a trip to Iceland a few years ago and it was nice to get a starter itinerary.

It was like using it to code - full of subtle mistakes and closed-down hotels

Re: ChatGPT Search

#814

Post by shmel »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #651
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 agree that this is the core question, but I'd put it as: Who Gets To Decide What Is True? With a search paradigm this wasn't an issue as much, because the answers were presented as "here's a bunch of websites that appear to deal with the question you asked". It was then up to the reader to decide which of those sites they wanted to visit, and therefore which viewpoints they got to see. With an LLM answering the que…

What is truth anyway? I see it as a quicker version of browsing to web to get a summary of what people say. As you said, with search you get a bunch of websites where strangers talk about a certain topic. You read a dozen and see if they agree with each other or if they sound legit.. There is just a huge overlap between what we consider true and what (an overwhelming majority of) people agree on. A lot of things are reduced to the consensus. If you ask a non-obvious question, you usually get an answer "a lot of people you consider trustworthy dedicated some time studying this question and agreed that the answer is X". But then people can be wrong, a big group of people can be wrong, people can be bribed or perhaps you don't actually trust these people that much. The internet can't tell you the truth. LLM can't tell you the truth. But they can summarize what other people in the world say on this subject.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#815

Post by gardenhedge »

kristopolous wrote: post #453
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…

There's this tech pattern of letting the cash-cow stagnate and deteriorate while focusing on high risk moonshots. This especially happens after they dominate the market. Take for example IE6, Intel, Facebook, IBM, and now Google. They have everything they need to keep things from going off the rails, management however has a tendency to delusionally assume their ship is so unsinkable that they're not even manning the…

Facebook is doing what is intended though?

Re: ChatGPT Search

#816

Post by linsomniac »

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…

>change how people find and access information

As someone who has been using google for search basically constantly since 1995, I've switched probably 90%+ of what normally would have been google searches over to Perplexity (which gives me references to web pages alongside answers to my questions, to review source materials) and ChatGPT (for more just answers I can verify without source). The remaining searches have gone to Kagi.

On the one hand this has got to be hurting Google search ad revenue. On the other hand I don't know if I ever clicked an advertised link. On the other other hand, not having to wade through SEO results has been so nice.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#817

Post by grobbyy »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #651
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 agree that this is the core question, but I'd put it as: Who Gets To Decide What Is True? With a search paradigm this wasn't an issue as much, because the answers were presented as "here's a bunch of websites that appear to deal with the question you asked". It was then up to the reader to decide which of those sites they wanted to visit, and therefore which viewpoints they got to see. With an LLM answering the que…

For the record, in my local elections, we have plenty of people voting illegally.

"Is it legal" is very different from "Can they."

By "local," I mean municipal and below. I didn't mean "federal elections conducted in my locality." Election security kicks for state, federal, and some municipal elections.

Others are intentionally fraudulent (e.g. local corruption) or unintentionally broken (e.g. using Google Forms for a school-level public body, where people not legally qualified to vote might still do it, unaware they're committing a felony).

And "public body" has a specific meaning under my state law which extends the same laws as e.g. cutting for my state senate. That's bodies like local school boards, but not random school clubs.

That's the level where we have massive illegal voting where I live.

Re: ChatGPT Search

#818

Post by linsomniac »

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…

>Google's Altavista moment

I'm wondering if they've seen the writing on the wall for a long time, and if diversification is going to save the day. I don't know that I've ever clicked on an ad in Google search results, but I happily pay them for a family account for Youtube and 2TB of drive storage, plus, you know, a flagship phone every couple years. :-)

Re: ChatGPT Search

#819

Post by themk »

newsclues wrote: post #765
lazerlapin wrote: post #743

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A better example might be "is dietary saturated fat a major factor for heart disease in Western countries?". The current government publications (which answer "yes") for this are probably wrong based on recent research. The government cannot be relied upon as a source of truth for this. I know it was just an example, but actually no, the role of dietary saturated fat as a factor for heart disease remains very much…

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9794145/ Remarkable how easy it is to cling to propaganda

Nina Teicholz being the distributor of this propaganda right?

Re: ChatGPT Search

#820

Post by zurfer »

pikseladam wrote: post #812

both google (gemini search) and openai announced it in the same day. why is that? https://developers.googleblog.com/en/gemini-api-and-ai-studi...

It's not the same thing. ChatGPT search is an end user facing offering that is not available via API.

Google's grounding feature is mostly for API users and seems like a parameter that can be used to first search before providing an answer. It seems quite expensive tbh but otherwise really nice. 35 USD / 1000 requests

Post reply on HN