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

Googlebook

googlebook.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: Googlebook

#961

Post by 22ekeke »

reisse wrote: post #907

I see the vision here, which the top commenters (sorry, couldn't read all of them) seems to miss. This should be a moonshot bet on the next generation of user experience. People are complaining about apps, but the idea here should be to make apps irrelevant as a concept. You don't need "apps", you need data feedable to LLM and a visualization toolkit for presenting results. And maybe some tools to manually wrangle th…

Imagine writing with such confidence about a thing that is akin to google Glass - DOA.

Re: Googlebook

#963

Post by spandrew »

reisse wrote: post #907

I see the vision here, which the top commenters (sorry, couldn't read all of them) seems to miss. This should be a moonshot bet on the next generation of user experience. People are complaining about apps, but the idea here should be to make apps irrelevant as a concept. You don't need "apps", you need data feedable to LLM and a visualization toolkit for presenting results. And maybe some tools to manually wrangle th…

This is not correct. People trust their "apps". They know Spotify's algo can feed them novel music. They know Kobo's reader connects to libraries in a way that isn't the DRM-lockin that Amazon shovels.

Most non-tech folks are incredibly skeptical about AI due to the piss-poor brand management of OpenAI and Anthropic—pushing an AGI Skynet post-employment narrative to make the tech feel bigger than it is.

I trust Google (and certainly Apple) to figure some of this stuff out—but nobody wants an LLM, that nobody knows how it operates, to run the show entirely. Heuristically, we may get away with a Human-on-the-loop approach—-not a Human-in-the-loop or Out-of-the-loop approach.

Re: Googlebook

#964

Post by gumby271 »

ajross wrote: post #953
isityettime wrote: post #931

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get Gemini to not cut me off mid-sentence and reply to only half of what I wanted to say. It doesn't reliably integrate with Google Maps. I can't trust it for basic shopping tasks because it doesn't reliably evaluate stated criteria. I can't even ask it if a specific web store has a specific item in stock and trust the answer. Google hasn't gotten the bare-ass basics right. They're not about to "make apps irr…

> I can't get Gemini to not cut me off mid-sentence and reply to only half of what I wanted to say. This kind of criticism is unpersuasive: "USENET and ftp are fine! Why do I need this monster 'mosaic' thing which needs 8MB of core just to try to see some buggy 'dynamic page' someone threw together where the server is always down anyway!" New technology is incomplete, rushed to market, inconsistently reliable and rap…

I would say we're reaching new levels of incomplete and rushed to market though. The original Google Search, Maps, Docs, etc. weren't feature rich, but what they had worked well. I'm not saying they were perfectly built, but they weren't falling apart to the degree Gemini and other Google products are. And Google gets to do this now, no one can compete or leave them, so why do anything well.

When Google first added Gemini to Sheets, I tried it and it completely hallucinated transaction data on the bank statement I was testing it on. It's worse than incomplete, it's broken and dangerous. But Google gets to slap a disclaimer on Gemini that says "results may be fucked" and they get a pass to ship it.

I have no expectation that Google can improve its new products since everything they've been doing is going in the opposite direction. You're not seeing pushback on embracing new technology, its purely about Google not being trusted to do things well.

Re: Googlebook

#965

Post by mrhottakes »

reisse wrote: post #907

I see the vision here, which the top commenters (sorry, couldn't read all of them) seems to miss. This should be a moonshot bet on the next generation of user experience. People are complaining about apps, but the idea here should be to make apps irrelevant as a concept. You don't need "apps", you need data feedable to LLM and a visualization toolkit for presenting results. And maybe some tools to manually wrangle th…

Maybe that's what you want, but why is your preference what "people" "need"?

Re: Googlebook

#966

Post by mrhottakes »

ajross wrote: post #953
isityettime wrote: post #931

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get Gemini to not cut me off mid-sentence and reply to only half of what I wanted to say. It doesn't reliably integrate with Google Maps. I can't trust it for basic shopping tasks because it doesn't reliably evaluate stated criteria. I can't even ask it if a specific web store has a specific item in stock and trust the answer. Google hasn't gotten the bare-ass basics right. They're not about to "make apps irr…

> I can't get Gemini to not cut me off mid-sentence and reply to only half of what I wanted to say. This kind of criticism is unpersuasive: "USENET and ftp are fine! Why do I need this monster 'mosaic' thing which needs 8MB of core just to try to see some buggy 'dynamic page' someone threw together where the server is always down anyway!" New technology is incomplete, rushed to market, inconsistently reliable and rap…

Your criticism is unpersuasive; you haven't laid out any actual argument, just sarcasm.

Re: Googlebook

#967

Post by stronglikedan »

spandrew wrote: post #963
reisse wrote: post #907

I see the vision here, which the top commenters (sorry, couldn't read all of them) seems to miss. This should be a moonshot bet on the next generation of user experience. People are complaining about apps, but the idea here should be to make apps irrelevant as a concept. You don't need "apps", you need data feedable to LLM and a visualization toolkit for presenting results. And maybe some tools to manually wrangle th…

This is not correct. People trust their "apps". They know Spotify's algo can feed them novel music. They know Kobo's reader connects to libraries in a way that isn't the DRM-lockin that Amazon shovels. Most non-tech folks are incredibly skeptical about AI due to the piss-poor brand management of OpenAI and Anthropic—pushing an AGI Skynet post-employment narrative to make the tech feel bigger than it is. I trust Googl…

> They know Spotify's algo can feed them novel music.

lol, hardly!

Re: Googlebook

#968

Post by disqard »

ajross wrote: post #953
isityettime wrote: post #931

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get Gemini to not cut me off mid-sentence and reply to only half of what I wanted to say. It doesn't reliably integrate with Google Maps. I can't trust it for basic shopping tasks because it doesn't reliably evaluate stated criteria. I can't even ask it if a specific web store has a specific item in stock and trust the answer. Google hasn't gotten the bare-ass basics right. They're not about to "make apps irr…

> I can't get Gemini to not cut me off mid-sentence and reply to only half of what I wanted to say. This kind of criticism is unpersuasive: "USENET and ftp are fine! Why do I need this monster 'mosaic' thing which needs 8MB of core just to try to see some buggy 'dynamic page' someone threw together where the server is always down anyway!" New technology is incomplete, rushed to market, inconsistently reliable and rap…

Your argument has merit.

I'm just going to point out that NCSA Mosaic was released in 1993, and the hand-wringing over it being an absolute memory pig is more 1999 than 2019.

But your overall point is well-taken.

Re: Googlebook

#970

Post by cloverich »

spandrew wrote: post #963
reisse wrote: post #907

I see the vision here, which the top commenters (sorry, couldn't read all of them) seems to miss. This should be a moonshot bet on the next generation of user experience. People are complaining about apps, but the idea here should be to make apps irrelevant as a concept. You don't need "apps", you need data feedable to LLM and a visualization toolkit for presenting results. And maybe some tools to manually wrangle th…

This is not correct. People trust their "apps". They know Spotify's algo can feed them novel music. They know Kobo's reader connects to libraries in a way that isn't the DRM-lockin that Amazon shovels. Most non-tech folks are incredibly skeptical about AI due to the piss-poor brand management of OpenAI and Anthropic—pushing an AGI Skynet post-employment narrative to make the tech feel bigger than it is. I trust Googl…

IMO the right next step, which Apple will get to slowly, is better Siri and better app intents. No apps reminds me a bit of the no folders, use search for everything and organize nothing, approach. To me it falls flat because structure - which apps provide - acts as context, memory, mental glue. Heck even changing the layout of apps on my home screen alters what i engage with, and remember to do.

Now generating apps will be game changer. But i dont think it means apps go away. I think we just get better apps, and more open apis (for llms to use).

Post reply on HN