4 ms·

This is why I use ChatGPT and Kagi over Google search now.

by calrain 3y ago

danielbln 3y ago
Same, but perplexity.ai for me. Search enabled LLMs that can slog through the search results for me is where it's at.
- gonzo41 3y ago
  But LLM's don't really do that. They take the shape and context of your prompt and respond with a corresponding shape of text. But im sure there's some hybrid in the works that will be very helpful soon.
  - danielbln 3y ago
    I'm not sure I follow, those hybrids exist today, I mentioned one of them. They tend to fire search queries, extract the content over multiple hops and inject it into the LLM prompt for evaluation and summary.
- YurgenJurgensen 3y ago
  If they appear to work now, it's because the SEO leeches haven't found them yet. If they ever become popular, they'll get inundated with garbage too.
- Varloom 3y ago
  Why I have never heard of perplexity.ai Just tried it, so good and fast.
  - danielbln 3y ago
    Not to sound like a total shill, but if you subscribe they let you switch the underlying llm to GPT-4 or Claude-2, which gives it some more oomph on more complex reasoning tasks. The free model is already quite good for research though.
phendrenad2 3y ago
All hail the paid web. It sure took a long time to get here, from humble beginnings 20+ years ago when salon.com toyed with the idea of charging a micro-fee per article view.
- somenameforme 3y ago
  Doesn't have to be the paid web. Paid is good, free is good. The cause of all problems is "free."
- Micoloth 3y ago
  For what it's worth, here's my worry about this: - Micro-fees for the web are a good idea. Because "If you don't pay you are the product", etc. - BUT, they HAVE to be micro-fees. Because of the fact that, EVERYONE uses the internet now. Literally almost all of humanity. To charge 30$ per Month (like ChatGPT does) for such a basic service, would bring an Incomprehensible amount of money in the hands of a few providers, which would make them even more dominant than they already are, I'm afraid. Technologically, we have now 0 problems to implement a solid micro-fee system. - "But"- you say- "The point of making people pay is to bring back competition, right? If a lot of people pay, more companies will compete to offer the same services and prices will go down". Well, I don't know about this. To me, it seems like the Internet is Intrinsically a monopolistic affair... VEry few companies have the know-how and resources to operate at Google Scale. Networks effects are a thing too (think reviews on Google Maps, etc), and so on... So I think, in the end, like many of the other basic utilities, prices will have to be controlled by regulation...
  - rcxdude 3y ago
    > BUT, they HAVE to be micro-fees. Because of the fact that, EVERYONE uses the internet now. Literally almost all of humanity. To charge 30$ per Month (like ChatGPT does) for such a basic service, would bring an Incomprehensible amount of money in the hands of a few providers, which would make them even more dominant than they already are, I'm afraid. Technologically, we have now 0 problems to implement a solid micro-fee system. It's worth pointing out that facebook makes on average $16 per month per US user, simply by selling ads to show them. And it makes $3 per month per global user.
idoubtit 3y ago
A few weeks ago, I had a question and I couldn't find the answer with Wikipedia or with internet searches. So I asked ChatGPT. I got an answer. Even better, it was sourced... Except that the source was a Wikipedia page that I had read and that didn't contain what I wanted. ChatGPT's answer was "fouled up beautifully", as Donald Knuth would say. A plain search is just a link and a quote, while the IA's answer is an educated guess. TL;DR ChatGPT can "lie" and its bad extrapolations are hard to debunk.
- manmal 3y ago
  Hallucinations have always been a problem with transformers. But with the replication crisis in many sciences and political meddling abound, I‘d be wary of any kind of critical information, especially on Wikipedia. Of course, transformer models have the same issues since they are trained on tainted info too.
  - moritzwarhier 3y ago
    > But with the replication crisis in many sciences and political meddling abound, I‘d be wary of any kind of critical information, especially on Wikipedia. Of course, transformer models have the same issues I think this is a bad comparison. The issues OP described are not limited to tainted training data. Being critical of Wikipedia and critical of science is not equal to treating text as a black box looking for the most fitting continuation. LLMs are not fact machines. When you equate this kind of error with the scientific replication crisis or generally a crtique of scientific methods and political influence (what about commercial?), I don't think this demonstrates critical thinking.
    - manmal 3y ago
      Can you point to where in my comment I asserted that hallucinations are equal to other sources of errors, or even compared them? Because I tend to agree with you. I tried to point out that info found externally always has to be cross-checked, no matter where it originates.
youngtaff 3y ago
LLMs is how we ended up with the top google answer for “which african country begins with k” being nonsense > While there are 54 recognized countries in Africa, none of them begin with the letter "K". The closest is Kenya, which starts with a "K" sound, but is actually spelled with a "K" sound. It's always interesting to learn new trivia facts like this. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=which+africa+countries+begin+with+k https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=which+africa+countries+beg...

This is why I use ChatGPT and Kagi over Google search now.

danielbln 3y ago

Same, but perplexity.ai for me. Search enabled LLMs that can slog through the search results for me is where it's at.

gonzo41 3y ago
But LLM's don't really do that. They take the shape and context of your prompt and respond with a corresponding shape of text. But im sure there's some hybrid in the works that will be very helpful soon.
- danielbln 3y ago
  I'm not sure I follow, those hybrids exist today, I mentioned one of them. They tend to fire search queries, extract the content over multiple hops and inject it into the LLM prompt for evaluation and summary.
YurgenJurgensen 3y ago
If they appear to work now, it's because the SEO leeches haven't found them yet. If they ever become popular, they'll get inundated with garbage too.
Varloom 3y ago
Why I have never heard of perplexity.ai Just tried it, so good and fast.
- danielbln 3y ago
  Not to sound like a total shill, but if you subscribe they let you switch the underlying llm to GPT-4 or Claude-2, which gives it some more oomph on more complex reasoning tasks. The free model is already quite good for research though.

phendrenad2 3y ago

All hail the paid web. It sure took a long time to get here, from humble beginnings 20+ years ago when salon.com toyed with the idea of charging a micro-fee per article view.

somenameforme 3y ago
Doesn't have to be the paid web. Paid is good, free is good. The cause of all problems is "free."
Micoloth 3y ago
For what it's worth, here's my worry about this: - Micro-fees for the web are a good idea. Because "If you don't pay you are the product", etc. - BUT, they HAVE to be micro-fees. Because of the fact that, EVERYONE uses the internet now. Literally almost all of humanity. To charge 30$ per Month (like ChatGPT does) for such a basic service, would bring an Incomprehensible amount of money in the hands of a few providers, which would make them even more dominant than they already are, I'm afraid. Technologically, we have now 0 problems to implement a solid micro-fee system. - "But"- you say- "The point of making people pay is to bring back competition, right? If a lot of people pay, more companies will compete to offer the same services and prices will go down". Well, I don't know about this. To me, it seems like the Internet is Intrinsically a monopolistic affair... VEry few companies have the know-how and resources to operate at Google Scale. Networks effects are a thing too (think reviews on Google Maps, etc), and so on... So I think, in the end, like many of the other basic utilities, prices will have to be controlled by regulation...
- rcxdude 3y ago
  > BUT, they HAVE to be micro-fees. Because of the fact that, EVERYONE uses the internet now. Literally almost all of humanity. To charge 30$ per Month (like ChatGPT does) for such a basic service, would bring an Incomprehensible amount of money in the hands of a few providers, which would make them even more dominant than they already are, I'm afraid. Technologically, we have now 0 problems to implement a solid micro-fee system. It's worth pointing out that facebook makes on average $16 per month per US user, simply by selling ads to show them. And it makes $3 per month per global user.

idoubtit 3y ago

A few weeks ago, I had a question and I couldn't find the answer with Wikipedia or with internet searches. So I asked ChatGPT. I got an answer. Even better, it was sourced... Except that the source was a Wikipedia page that I had read and that didn't contain what I wanted. ChatGPT's answer was "fouled up beautifully", as Donald Knuth would say. A plain search is just a link and a quote, while the IA's answer is an educated guess. TL;DR ChatGPT can "lie" and its bad extrapolations are hard to debunk.

manmal 3y ago
Hallucinations have always been a problem with transformers. But with the replication crisis in many sciences and political meddling abound, I‘d be wary of any kind of critical information, especially on Wikipedia. Of course, transformer models have the same issues since they are trained on tainted info too.
- moritzwarhier 3y ago
  > But with the replication crisis in many sciences and political meddling abound, I‘d be wary of any kind of critical information, especially on Wikipedia. Of course, transformer models have the same issues I think this is a bad comparison. The issues OP described are not limited to tainted training data. Being critical of Wikipedia and critical of science is not equal to treating text as a black box looking for the most fitting continuation. LLMs are not fact machines. When you equate this kind of error with the scientific replication crisis or generally a crtique of scientific methods and political influence (what about commercial?), I don't think this demonstrates critical thinking.
  - manmal 3y ago
    Can you point to where in my comment I asserted that hallucinations are equal to other sources of errors, or even compared them? Because I tend to agree with you. I tried to point out that info found externally always has to be cross-checked, no matter where it originates.

youngtaff 3y ago

LLMs is how we ended up with the top google answer for “which african country begins with k” being nonsense > While there are 54 recognized countries in Africa, none of them begin with the letter "K". The closest is Kenya, which starts with a "K" sound, but is actually spelled with a "K" sound. It's always interesting to learn new trivia facts like this. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=which+africa+countries+begin+with+k https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=which+africa+countries+beg...