> People expect searches for factual information to be inaccurate probably 1 in 10,000 times.
Do they? I saw someone recommend using ChatGPT to learn how something worked earlier today on HN. And there were replies that agreed.
A ton of people seem excited about AI search. Google is bad enough without it at this point. But to me it feels like those helper chatbots that appeared everywhere a few years ago, redux.
Sure they have a more realistic tone and can understand questions far better than basic pattern matching. But it still doesn’t work.
I switched to DuckDuckGo about 2 months ago. The results seem about 95% as good as Google for most things, without all the ads and nonsense.
I have a hard time seeing today’s AI, impressive as it is in many ways, making search results more accurate. If they wanted to do that I feel like Google has a ton of low hanging fruit to fix already instead of hasty “features” to try and not look “behind”.
Do they? I saw someone recommend using ChatGPT to learn how something worked earlier today on HN. And there were replies that agreed.
A ton of people seem excited about AI search. Google is bad enough without it at this point. But to me it feels like those helper chatbots that appeared everywhere a few years ago, redux.
Sure they have a more realistic tone and can understand questions far better than basic pattern matching. But it still doesn’t work.
I switched to DuckDuckGo about 2 months ago. The results seem about 95% as good as Google for most things, without all the ads and nonsense.
I have a hard time seeing today’s AI, impressive as it is in many ways, making search results more accurate. If they wanted to do that I feel like Google has a ton of low hanging fruit to fix already instead of hasty “features” to try and not look “behind”.