News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Bing sees 15.8% boost in visits following GPT-4 push, as Google sees a decline. Parent comment

Re:Bing sees 15.8% boost in visits following GPT-4 push, as ... by hombre_fatal on Friday March 24, 2023 @06:13PM (#35296399)
Even though Google returns results instantly, for most things I still have to evaluate and click links and skim them for the information I want. Sometimes I have to do multiple searches (like one for retinol and another for beta-carotene in the following example).

Yesterday I heard about retinol (vitamin A) mentioned in a nutrition podcast. I know carrots are high in vitamin A, but I didn't think they had retinol, so I wanted to learn more about that.

I whipped out my phone and asked GPT-3 "retinol vs. the vitamin A in carrots" (something I know you usually can't ask Google).

A few seconds later, I learned that retinol is vitamin A's final form in the body, thus you get it directly from animal products, and beta-carotene—found in plants—is a precursor to retinol in the body.

I do these kinds of searches all day. One thing faster about GPT as well is that I don't have to consider the "query engineering" to make Google return what I want, I just ask GPT a question streamed from my consciousness.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Bing sees 15.8% boost in visits following GPT-4 push, as ... by dmix on Friday March 24, 2023 @08:06PM (#35297411)
Yeah for questions with absolute answers that can be summarized like that it's perfect. Basically what Wolfram Alpha offered with quant data.

Although my partner is a lawyer and she sometimes asks it to summarize cases (without providing the full source material manually) and it sometimes invents entire details in the cases in a very persuasive way. So you always have to be careful and double check if it's important.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Bing sees 15.8% boost in visits following GPT-4 push, as ... by grog454 on Friday March 24, 2023 @09:30PM (#35298169)
Code and case summaries couldn't be much different. With code you get compile time validation, run time validation, (hopefully) test validation, and you can generally look at a block of code and say "seems like this should work" or "this makes no sense". You get none of that with facts of a case.
[ Parent | on HN ]