6 ms·

I was not at all surprised, to be honest. ChatGPT took over about 90-95% of my what I would previously resort to Google. Since Microsoft was dealing cards at Op

I was not at all surprised, to be honest. ChatGPT took over about 90-95% of my what I would previously resort to Google. Since Microsoft was dealing cards at OpenAI, it was just a matter of time...

xnx 4y ago
90-95% of your searches don't require information more recent than September 2021?
- htrp 4y ago
  bing actually uses search results as part of the llm context window. it solves a lot for hallicination and current event problems you have in chatgpt
- penjelly 4y ago
  in my exp. bing even hallucinates the sources. I use chatgpt and bing side by side instead of the average google, then resort to google with those both fail. i find chatgpt 3.5 answers better than bing. Also ive had bing end conversion with me on more than one occasion without saying anything offensive
- JohnFen 4y ago
  That sounds about right for me. When I'm searching the web for information, only rarely does that information have to be newer than that. That said, I'm not a fan of using these tools for search. For me, anyway, they don't even come close to doing what I want when I'm searching the web.
- rmbyrro 4y ago
  No. In few cases where there is time sensitivity, it's not an issue. I'm using it to help me with a library integration, for example. I noticed it was recommending deprecated methods. So I copy/pasted the latest source code, asked it to update itself, and voilá. It's super smart and learns literally in a second. Just drop recent information at it and ask what you need.
robotresearcher 4y ago
How do you manage the hallucination problems, or do you not seem to be having them? I’m blown away by the competence of the language model but its willingness to make up facts makes me leary.
- cruano 4y ago
  > its willingness to make up facts makes me leary I see you haven't met humans
  - stanac 4y ago
    We can downvote human comments and proposed solution (on stack overflow, hn, etc...) and also I don't expect colleagues to lied to me when I ask them about a feature or how to do xyz in a language or library or framework. Bing, IIRC, has a way to provide feedback, not sure how useful it is for today's users and if it will be able to solve hallucinations one day.
    - mark_l_watson 4y ago
      I try to always give Bing+ChatGPT chat or search results a thumbs up or a thumbs down. I am using the service for free, so it seems fair for me to take a moment to provide feedback.
  - zouhair 4y ago
    Humans are actually quite reliable. Wikipedia is that trust manifested. Also a human liar knows they are lying, AI doesn't know it's saying something wrong.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      That's why we call it hallucinating rather than lying. Confusing the two is conceptually unhygienic.
    - loandbehold 4y ago
      Humans can also give wrong information without realizing it.
MattGaiser 4y ago
How are you dealing with it just manufacturing answers it does not readily have? Or is that pretty much the same as SEO spam and easy to filter out?
- rmbyrro 4y ago
  GPT4 is much better at it. So far, I haven't seen it hallucinate. GPT3 hallucinates terribly, but not that often, and it's fairly predictable in what kinds of questions it's more inclined to hallucinate.
derefr 4y ago
Can you give examples of the average pre-ChatGPT Google queries you were doing, that ChatGPT can fully handle? Personally — and having not tried ChatGPT for this — I don't think ChatGPT would do well with resolving the kinds of queries I consider Google "good at." To me, the place where Google wins over Bing, DDG, etc. is when I know there must exist some page that uniquely talks about some extremely niche overlap of concepts; but I don't know any specific "natural key" keywords to refer to the that overlapped-set-of-concepts, and instead only have a "cloud of highly-correlated keywords for the individual concepts involved" to throw into the search box. For example, if I'm trying to conjure from the aether a discussion people are having about an issue I'm facing with some buggy behavior in an API — where that buggy behavior doesn't spit out any distinctive error message to use in the search. I could see ChatGPT being good at a limited version of this problem, where I could give it e.g. several definitions of a word (= correlated keywords), and it could tell me the word that fits those definitions. But the full version of the problem — pointing you at (or regurgitating) the one unique conversation that most highly correlates with your keyword cloud — essentially implies an Internet-scale "language model": one where there are unique vertices for every unique URL. Which, if you think about it, is what a traditional search engine's index is: a very dumb, but very large correlational language model, where that "dumbness" is a valuable constraint meaning that queries are able to be run map-reduced across many nodes. Is there something I'm missing here, that makes Bing+ChatGPT better at these types of queries than Google is? Or are the advantages ChatGPT is bringing to the table here, in areas that have nothing to do with making search engines better at the things they're already "the best tool for the job" at, and instead are in solving problems that could be solved any number of other ways (e.g. querying a search assistant such as Siri/Alexa; or pulling up an encyclopedia article or textbook relevant to the subject and just reading it) such that a search engine wouldn't necessarily be the first tool you'd search for?
- nemothekid 4y ago
  There are several engineering tasks that I've just found explained better by ChatGPT than scouring Google for out of date documentation or abandoned forum posts. For example a while back I needed to encode some AAC audio frames into the ADTS format. In the work I've been doing recently, this isn't a hard task given you have the spec. The problem was I couldn't find the spec on Google - arguably it's not well supported either. No problem for ChatGPT however which was not only able to write the code, but write it in Rust - the target language Iw as going to. Now I've just found it easier to ask ChatGPT first then go go google.
thatguy0900 4y ago
I'm very curious what will happen when seo spammers come after chatgpt.
- rmbyrro 4y ago
  I'm sure they'll use ChatGPT to come up with solutions. Spammers will, too, and since OpenAI has access to what they're asking and can easily flag their questions, they can feed misleading guidance to spammers.

I was not at all surprised, to be honest. ChatGPT took over about 90-95% of my what I would previously resort to Google. Since Microsoft was dealing cards at OpenAI, it was just a matter of time...

xnx 4y ago

90-95% of your searches don't require information more recent than September 2021?

htrp 4y ago
bing actually uses search results as part of the llm context window. it solves a lot for hallicination and current event problems you have in chatgpt
penjelly 4y ago
in my exp. bing even hallucinates the sources. I use chatgpt and bing side by side instead of the average google, then resort to google with those both fail. i find chatgpt 3.5 answers better than bing. Also ive had bing end conversion with me on more than one occasion without saying anything offensive
JohnFen 4y ago
That sounds about right for me. When I'm searching the web for information, only rarely does that information have to be newer than that. That said, I'm not a fan of using these tools for search. For me, anyway, they don't even come close to doing what I want when I'm searching the web.
rmbyrro 4y ago
No. In few cases where there is time sensitivity, it's not an issue. I'm using it to help me with a library integration, for example. I noticed it was recommending deprecated methods. So I copy/pasted the latest source code, asked it to update itself, and voilá. It's super smart and learns literally in a second. Just drop recent information at it and ask what you need.

robotresearcher 4y ago

How do you manage the hallucination problems, or do you not seem to be having them? I’m blown away by the competence of the language model but its willingness to make up facts makes me leary.

cruano 4y ago
> its willingness to make up facts makes me leary I see you haven't met humans
- stanac 4y ago
  We can downvote human comments and proposed solution (on stack overflow, hn, etc...) and also I don't expect colleagues to lied to me when I ask them about a feature or how to do xyz in a language or library or framework. Bing, IIRC, has a way to provide feedback, not sure how useful it is for today's users and if it will be able to solve hallucinations one day.
  - mark_l_watson 4y ago
    I try to always give Bing+ChatGPT chat or search results a thumbs up or a thumbs down. I am using the service for free, so it seems fair for me to take a moment to provide feedback.
- zouhair 4y ago
  Humans are actually quite reliable. Wikipedia is that trust manifested. Also a human liar knows they are lying, AI doesn't know it's saying something wrong.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    That's why we call it hallucinating rather than lying. Confusing the two is conceptually unhygienic.
  - loandbehold 4y ago
    Humans can also give wrong information without realizing it.

MattGaiser 4y ago

How are you dealing with it just manufacturing answers it does not readily have? Or is that pretty much the same as SEO spam and easy to filter out?

rmbyrro 4y ago
GPT4 is much better at it. So far, I haven't seen it hallucinate. GPT3 hallucinates terribly, but not that often, and it's fairly predictable in what kinds of questions it's more inclined to hallucinate.

derefr 4y ago

Can you give examples of the average pre-ChatGPT Google queries you were doing, that ChatGPT can fully handle? Personally — and having not tried ChatGPT for this — I don't think ChatGPT would do well with resolving the kinds of queries I consider Google "good at." To me, the place where Google wins over Bing, DDG, etc. is when I know there must exist some page that uniquely talks about some extremely niche overlap of concepts; but I don't know any specific "natural key" keywords to refer to the that overlapped-set-of-concepts, and instead only have a "cloud of highly-correlated keywords for the individual concepts involved" to throw into the search box. For example, if I'm trying to conjure from the aether a discussion people are having about an issue I'm facing with some buggy behavior in an API — where that buggy behavior doesn't spit out any distinctive error message to use in the search. I could see ChatGPT being good at a limited version of this problem, where I could give it e.g. several definitions of a word (= correlated keywords), and it could tell me the word that fits those definitions. But the full version of the problem — pointing you at (or regurgitating) the one unique conversation that most highly correlates with your keyword cloud — essentially implies an Internet-scale "language model": one where there are unique vertices for every unique URL. Which, if you think about it, is what a traditional search engine's index is: a very dumb, but very large correlational language model, where that "dumbness" is a valuable constraint meaning that queries are able to be run map-reduced across many nodes. Is there something I'm missing here, that makes Bing+ChatGPT better at these types of queries than Google is? Or are the advantages ChatGPT is bringing to the table here, in areas that have nothing to do with making search engines better at the things they're already "the best tool for the job" at, and instead are in solving problems that could be solved any number of other ways (e.g. querying a search assistant such as Siri/Alexa; or pulling up an encyclopedia article or textbook relevant to the subject and just reading it) such that a search engine wouldn't necessarily be the first tool you'd search for?

nemothekid 4y ago
There are several engineering tasks that I've just found explained better by ChatGPT than scouring Google for out of date documentation or abandoned forum posts. For example a while back I needed to encode some AAC audio frames into the ADTS format. In the work I've been doing recently, this isn't a hard task given you have the spec. The problem was I couldn't find the spec on Google - arguably it's not well supported either. No problem for ChatGPT however which was not only able to write the code, but write it in Rust - the target language Iw as going to. Now I've just found it easier to ask ChatGPT first then go go google.

thatguy0900 4y ago

I'm very curious what will happen when seo spammers come after chatgpt.

rmbyrro 4y ago
I'm sure they'll use ChatGPT to come up with solutions. Spammers will, too, and since OpenAI has access to what they're asking and can easily flag their questions, they can feed misleading guidance to spammers.