7 ms·

Consequently, this is probably the beginning of a very abrupt end for traditional search.

by lb4r 4y ago

pphysch 4y ago
It's going to eat up a lot of Wikipedia, StackOverflow, Quora, etc. traffic but it doesn't change the reality that often you need a real link to somewhere else on the Internet. And all of that is still going through Google or Bing.
- lb4r 4y ago
  There will still be links, but I'm guessing it will be GPT saying: "Here's a link on the topic: ..." And if you still need more links, there will of course be a way to access the old search, but it won't be front and center.
  - pphysch 4y ago
    If I type "wapo" into Google or Bing, I don't want an earfull from a LLM about what "wapo" might mean (especially if streamed slowly a la current ChatGPT), I want a link to Washington Post's current frontpage.
    - lb4r 4y ago
      That seems like a trivial matter of fine-tuning the model so that it includes the link on those types of queries. For example, if you search for a website, I doubt it would be hard to have the AI infer that it's a website and include a link to it.
- mwaitjmp 4y ago
  From what I’ve seen chatgpt is able to generate a list of links for a topic you are discussing. They seemed very relevant to me when I tried this. Obviously it won’t have anything post 2021 but for some subjects it’s fine.
  - residentraspber 4y ago
    The article states that they got a demo where they were able to ask questions about the new Bing launch, so the delay is ~hours now, not 2021 anymore (at least, for this new Microsoft thing).
- raincole 4y ago
  I mean yes, but what stopped ChatGPT2 from doing this for you? "As a language model, I don't have the knowledge to answer your question 'who won 2024 world cup?'. These are the search result from Bing engine: ..." Then you never need to actually access google.com or bing.com.
- medion 4y ago
  Yes, this is a serious concern. These GPT's have stolen the collective knowledge these places have created, particularly Wikipedia - MS will refactor it and spew it out through a Microsoft portal. In effect, ChatGPT becomes a new window into the 'hand' generated Internet - eventually this window will be a new corporate garden wall. Huge swathes of traffic will be pulled from the likes of Wikipedia, StackOverflow, blogs, etc - basically any public facing source of knowledge/information. It's not good.
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    If websites don't want their content republished, they should use appropriate licenses restricting such uses. For example, Wikipedia licenses all encyclopedic text under CC BY-SA 3.0[1] and GFDL[2], both of which permit free-as-in-libre redistribution. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_Creative... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free...
    - medion 4y ago
      But GPT’s can restructure copyrighted text to make it different enough for it not to be direct theft. It won’t be long till you can get an entire book, feed it in and prompt it to regenerate the book in a different style. Then what happens? Or what about taking books out of copyright, then prompting regeneration in a different style with a slightly modified plot?
      - Dalewyn 4y ago
        If you can prove there was a source and that source was used without appropriate licensing, that is a valid case of copyright infringement and possibly even IP theft. We really need to stop muddying the water surrounding "AI" and their use of source materials. Those so-called "AIs" are just software like any other program, they are tools like any other computer application, and the copyright and licensing legal precedences that apply to software apply to them. Obligatory IANAL.
- Miraste 4y ago
  If it works like the other GPT search engines that have popped up, it does provide links.
basch 4y ago
It's an end to keyword search. Search now has state. I can search something, and then manipulate the results. Filter the results. I dont have to start over with a new query, or mess with quotes and -signs, which has been utterly terrible ever since google started taking things like that as suggestions. Or when I search for 4-5 words, and it instantly chooses to leave out the most important of the 5 terms so it can return tons of utterly useless off topic stuff.
- PenguinCoder 4y ago
  I absolutely hate this, and it turns the search useless to me. When searching with "direct quotes" on Google, it has ignored my exact term in quotes and shown me results WITHOUT THAT KEYWORD. Useless.
  - basch 4y ago
    It is utter baffling how often I will search a couple terms and the top 5 results will say missing x and make me click to bring back my most important term. Obviously the term that is most limiting my search result volume is a candidate for either causing interference, or BEING the most important term. The frequency with which google chooses to disregard that word instead of focusing on it is just painful. Why theyve chosen to optimize for returning the MOST results is just misguided. I do not need or care for 10k results. Give me 90 that are actually useful.
  - rippercushions 4y ago
    This was finally largely fixed last year. https://blog.google/products/search/how-were-improving-search-results-when-you-use-quotes/ https://blog.google/products/search/how-were-improving-searc...
    - basch 4y ago
      That doesnt appear to be related. Your post is about making the preview text more relevant.
  - layer8 4y ago
timeon 4y ago
New era of confidentially incorrect search results.

Consequently, this is probably the beginning of a very abrupt end for traditional search.

by lb4r 4y ago

Consequently, this is probably the beginning of a very abrupt end for traditional search.

It's going to eat up a lot of Wikipedia, StackOverflow, Quora, etc. traffic but it doesn't change the reality that often you need a real link to somewhere else on the Internet. And all of that is still going through Google or Bing.

lb4r 4y ago
There will still be links, but I'm guessing it will be GPT saying: "Here's a link on the topic: ..." And if you still need more links, there will of course be a way to access the old search, but it won't be front and center.
- pphysch 4y ago
  If I type "wapo" into Google or Bing, I don't want an earfull from a LLM about what "wapo" might mean (especially if streamed slowly a la current ChatGPT), I want a link to Washington Post's current frontpage.
  - lb4r 4y ago
    That seems like a trivial matter of fine-tuning the model so that it includes the link on those types of queries. For example, if you search for a website, I doubt it would be hard to have the AI infer that it's a website and include a link to it.
mwaitjmp 4y ago
From what I’ve seen chatgpt is able to generate a list of links for a topic you are discussing. They seemed very relevant to me when I tried this. Obviously it won’t have anything post 2021 but for some subjects it’s fine.
- residentraspber 4y ago
  The article states that they got a demo where they were able to ask questions about the new Bing launch, so the delay is ~hours now, not 2021 anymore (at least, for this new Microsoft thing).
raincole 4y ago
I mean yes, but what stopped ChatGPT2 from doing this for you? "As a language model, I don't have the knowledge to answer your question 'who won 2024 world cup?'. These are the search result from Bing engine: ..." Then you never need to actually access google.com or bing.com.
medion 4y ago
Yes, this is a serious concern. These GPT's have stolen the collective knowledge these places have created, particularly Wikipedia - MS will refactor it and spew it out through a Microsoft portal. In effect, ChatGPT becomes a new window into the 'hand' generated Internet - eventually this window will be a new corporate garden wall. Huge swathes of traffic will be pulled from the likes of Wikipedia, StackOverflow, blogs, etc - basically any public facing source of knowledge/information. It's not good.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  If websites don't want their content republished, they should use appropriate licenses restricting such uses. For example, Wikipedia licenses all encyclopedic text under CC BY-SA 3.0[1] and GFDL[2], both of which permit free-as-in-libre redistribution. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_Creative... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free...
  - medion 4y ago
    But GPT’s can restructure copyrighted text to make it different enough for it not to be direct theft. It won’t be long till you can get an entire book, feed it in and prompt it to regenerate the book in a different style. Then what happens? Or what about taking books out of copyright, then prompting regeneration in a different style with a slightly modified plot?
    - Dalewyn 4y ago
      If you can prove there was a source and that source was used without appropriate licensing, that is a valid case of copyright infringement and possibly even IP theft. We really need to stop muddying the water surrounding "AI" and their use of source materials. Those so-called "AIs" are just software like any other program, they are tools like any other computer application, and the copyright and licensing legal precedences that apply to software apply to them. Obligatory IANAL.
Miraste 4y ago
If it works like the other GPT search engines that have popped up, it does provide links.

basch 4y ago

It's an end to keyword search. Search now has state. I can search something, and then manipulate the results. Filter the results. I dont have to start over with a new query, or mess with quotes and -signs, which has been utterly terrible ever since google started taking things like that as suggestions. Or when I search for 4-5 words, and it instantly chooses to leave out the most important of the 5 terms so it can return tons of utterly useless off topic stuff.

PenguinCoder 4y ago
I absolutely hate this, and it turns the search useless to me. When searching with "direct quotes" on Google, it has ignored my exact term in quotes and shown me results WITHOUT THAT KEYWORD. Useless.
- basch 4y ago
  It is utter baffling how often I will search a couple terms and the top 5 results will say missing x and make me click to bring back my most important term. Obviously the term that is most limiting my search result volume is a candidate for either causing interference, or BEING the most important term. The frequency with which google chooses to disregard that word instead of focusing on it is just painful. Why theyve chosen to optimize for returning the MOST results is just misguided. I do not need or care for 10k results. Give me 90 that are actually useful.
- rippercushions 4y ago
  This was finally largely fixed last year. https://blog.google/products/search/how-were-improving-search-results-when-you-use-quotes/ https://blog.google/products/search/how-were-improving-searc...
  - basch 4y ago
    That doesnt appear to be related. Your post is about making the preview text more relevant.
- layer8 4y ago

timeon 4y ago

New era of confidentially incorrect search results.