I can relate to the 10-for-Google-90-for-ChatGPT ratio. I use Google when I know the words that make up the name of a website, but not the URL itself. So Googl

I can relate to the 10-for-Google-90-for-ChatGPT ratio. I use Google when I know the words that make up the name of a website, but not the URL itself. So Google is for unsophisticated searches. I also use Google instead of HN's own search function when looking for older submissions here. What I like about about ChatGPT (and friends) is the ability to synthesize knowledge from unrelated bits and pieces in different sources. In contrast, if it could verbalize what it's doing to you, a traditional search engine would say here's a link dump, have fun with it, and have a nice day. If half the knowledge you're looking for is stored on web page A towards the bottom, and the other half on web page B in the first few paragraphs, a traditional search engine will dump on you links to web pages A and B, followed by some filler URLs pointing at documents that happen to vaguely match your search keywords. This is a very subpar experience by today's standards, but it's so ingrained into our habits that we're not complaining.