3 ms·

I've switched to using Claude for most of my "queries" that are not me searching for a particular document and virtually all of my coding questions. It's very g

I've switched to using Claude for most of my "queries" that are not me searching for a particular document and virtually all of my coding questions. It's very good when you have a question about a broader topic that you want to be able to ask lots of specific questions about. The experience really reminds me of when Google original appeared on the scene in the early 2000s. It was the first time on the web that you could easily find anything and the first search engine that didn't feel overrun by spam. There have been many topics I've wanted to understand better that essentially require a dive into multiple wikipedia pages. Claude makes wandering around that graph unnecessary and really accelerates the learning/exploration process. It also allows queries that were previously impossible, for example "tell me if this movie has a happy ending but otherwise don't give me any spoilers". Initially I wasn't sure I would personally ever use LLMs as an alternative to search, but as I've learned to treat them differently than a standard search engine I find for many cases there's no reason to return to the ever decaying mess that is Google in it's current form.

hedora 2y ago
Append a ? to a Kagi search and you get the best of both worlds: it'll add LLM results (Claude at the moment) to a box at the top of your search. I think it's some sort of RAG model that they built on top of their search engine. You can try the LLM half of it here without an account: https://kagi.com/fastgpt https://kagi.com/fastgpt edit: I tried the perplexity link in the article. For my test query, the text it generated was similar, but it didn't cite any websites to back up its claims. That's useless! I thought having the LLM link to sources was already table stakes.
- mdp2021 2y ago
  > kagi ... fastgpt I asked a speculative question to FastGPT@Kagi and it returned a "Dunno" as the three Wikipedia pages it suggests having checked did not contain an obvious reply. I asked the same to Perplexity and it returned a plausible speculative logical reply with more credible reference links. There is a strong difference between "looking for documents" and "asking sensible questions". FastGPT@Kagi could neither reply to the question nor find web pages that could be interesting to extrapolate the answer.

hedora 2y ago

Append a ? to a Kagi search and you get the best of both worlds: it'll add LLM results (Claude at the moment) to a box at the top of your search. I think it's some sort of RAG model that they built on top of their search engine. You can try the LLM half of it here without an account: https://kagi.com/fastgpt https://kagi.com/fastgpt edit: I tried the perplexity link in the article. For my test query, the text it generated was similar, but it didn't cite any websites to back up its claims. That's useless! I thought having the LLM link to sources was already table stakes.

mdp2021 2y ago
> kagi ... fastgpt I asked a speculative question to FastGPT@Kagi and it returned a "Dunno" as the three Wikipedia pages it suggests having checked did not contain an obvious reply. I asked the same to Perplexity and it returned a plausible speculative logical reply with more credible reference links. There is a strong difference between "looking for documents" and "asking sensible questions". FastGPT@Kagi could neither reply to the question nor find web pages that could be interesting to extrapolate the answer.