Submitted by shanoshamanizum t3_10pxt18 in Futurology
Plantarbre t1_j6mufzk wrote
You're getting it wrong.
AI is an optimization tool. It won't be used as a search engine, but it might solve optimization problems within the search itself. For example, it could be used to search more potent nodes and alleviate the load.
AI is not a black box. We know what's inside, and we build it with specific functions and layers in mind. The people in charge of building a search engine are likely in touch with the technology.
Datasets don't necessarily need to be large. "Large" is all relative, it depends on what you actually study. Images and videos are heavy. It is filtered and augmented if the size is not sufficient.
Every search engine, by design, is biased. You just accept the bias from the current one because that's all you've ever known. You don't accept another bias because you won't read how it was built. I seriously doubt you have spent much time on the search index to find out its biases.
AI could be useful in order to classify search nodes, but a search engine, by design, needs to be quick. If there is an AI, it must be sufficiently fast, and thus sufficiently small, to run within milliseconds, multiple times for each search.
An AI may not be fit for this kind of problem. AI requires the problem to be established within a (usually) twice differentiable space because of backpropagation. A tree search problem is typically non-differentiable in nature, and derivative-based methods yield poor results. You can throw money at a dataset problem. You can't throw money at mathematics.
shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mvct7 wrote
The question in discussion is freedom of choice for the user. There is no freedom in receiving a single answer to anything.
Plantarbre t1_j6n0okw wrote
AI does not have to give a single answer to anything. This is a design choice. Artistic AIs usually give multiple answers because this is relevant in this field. Chat-GPT gives a single answer because multiple answers was deemed not relevant.
shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n10ya wrote
Yet it makes the choices on my behalf which is the core problem.
TiredOldLamb t1_j6n1sa5 wrote
You just need to ask it to give you multiple answers and it will
shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n1v6g wrote
I don't need answers I need raw information to analyze myself.
TiredOldLamb t1_j6n2uk0 wrote
"AI, please give me raw information from 4 sources about that topic I am curious about."
Why do you think AI is going to censor the output, but Google won't censor the links it shows?
shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n33vs wrote
Because a search engine is supposed to return all results while AI will aim for an answer first and foremost.
ibDABIN t1_j6n6apk wrote
But if the answer is to return a list of information, how does this not fit the bill? I've used ChatGPT as a search engine for like a week now and while it isn't always great on the first response, it almost always gives me a synopsis of Google's top results and I can easily pivot on scope with a follow up.
shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n6i1r wrote
Can you elaborate further on your experience? Does it produce the same results? Where does it get the index from?
If I do a search with perplexity.ai and then google perpelexity gives me an answer and references not search results.
ibDABIN t1_j6nxjie wrote
Well, my experience is admittedly limited as I've only used it where I work since the beginning of last week. I have only double checked Google's top results a couple of times to see the content of the results vs what I received from ChatGPT but it was largely the same. Granted, these instances were code requests where I was asking for methods to do a certain thing using different namespaces.
Whenever I have asked ChatGPT for suggestions or a list of ideas, it always obliges and gives me a lengthy, bulleted list. It is unable to provide links but it seems to bypass that need by extrapolating the information from top results.
It certainly can't replace Google now due to dataset limitations but since I've started using ChatGPT, my feelings have remained the same regarding it's use case. It feels and behaves like a more intuitive search engine and I could absolutely see it replacing search engines in the future. There isn't really a need for a collection of URLs when you can skip that step and immediately get the content you are looking for without the browsing.
Could my opinion change with further use? For sure. I am really only using it for mundane coding at the moment.
whtevn t1_j6n577c wrote
you can still use google
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments