5 ms·

Those don't seem different to me. it seems like youve internalized the query syntax of search engines and youre fine with erroneous results.

nkrisc 2y ago
> it seems like youve internalized the query syntax of search engines If by syntax you mean "words related to what I want to find" then I suppose. > youre fine with erroneous results. Because AI is famously correct all the time. And there are no "erroneous" results in my method, only ones not closely enough related to what I wanted, so that's feedback my search terms should be refined. Any answer I get from AI I’m going to have to verify anyway so I just skip the AI step.
- nh23423fefe 2y ago
  no by query syntax i mean what people have called google fu. yeah seems the same to me. type some stuff, read the response, evaluate, loop or break. cool you hate ai and dont want to learn a new pattern. but you say i dont want to think which doesnt make sense. you are thinking just as hard.
  - nkrisc 2y ago
    > what people have called google fu I don’t know what that means in any specific sense. I don’t want to think about how to interact with the search mechanism. It’s the same problem with using voice assistants like Siri - I have to think about how to construct my query so that it will be parsed correctly. With most search engines I can just type in disparate terms that might be related. The order doesn’t matter, the phrasing doesn’t matter, I don’t need to give it instructions on how to respond, etc.
    - nh23423fefe 2y ago
      > I don’t know what that means ironic > I don’t want to think about how to interact with the search mechanism. so then why did you proceed to describe a process whereby you iterative construct high entropy tokens to submit to a search engine because you have an internal model of their indexing process by ad hoc interactions for years?

nkrisc 2y ago

> it seems like youve internalized the query syntax of search engines If by syntax you mean "words related to what I want to find" then I suppose. > youre fine with erroneous results. Because AI is famously correct all the time. And there are no "erroneous" results in my method, only ones not closely enough related to what I wanted, so that's feedback my search terms should be refined. Any answer I get from AI I’m going to have to verify anyway so I just skip the AI step.

nh23423fefe 2y ago
no by query syntax i mean what people have called google fu. yeah seems the same to me. type some stuff, read the response, evaluate, loop or break. cool you hate ai and dont want to learn a new pattern. but you say i dont want to think which doesnt make sense. you are thinking just as hard.
- nkrisc 2y ago
  > what people have called google fu I don’t know what that means in any specific sense. I don’t want to think about how to interact with the search mechanism. It’s the same problem with using voice assistants like Siri - I have to think about how to construct my query so that it will be parsed correctly. With most search engines I can just type in disparate terms that might be related. The order doesn’t matter, the phrasing doesn’t matter, I don’t need to give it instructions on how to respond, etc.
  - nh23423fefe 2y ago
    > I don’t know what that means ironic > I don’t want to think about how to interact with the search mechanism. so then why did you proceed to describe a process whereby you iterative construct high entropy tokens to submit to a search engine because you have an internal model of their indexing process by ad hoc interactions for years?