Re:Substack Notes Launched
by emodendroket on Tuesday April 11, 2023 @05:25PM
(#35531788)
The fear of investors and, to some extent, Google, is that LLMs will supplant traditional search and by the time enough people are catching on to affect metrics the momentum will be too great to stop. My experience with LLMs has not led me to believe that is all that likely but opinions differ there.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
We need search to be able to fact check the LLMs, but this might become extremely difficult once all the content is written by them…
Just like how it is hard to fact-check Wikipedia now that it's used a reference. A thought came to me - perhaps it's Wikipedia that should be worried that it'll be supplanted by LLMs.
[citation needed]
The phenomenon they're referring to is when something spurious is posted on Wikipedia with no or poor citations, then used as the source for a "reputable" article (without citations), then the article is cited by Wikipedia, making the spurious information look more trustworthy.
1) that hardly ever happens, it hasn’t caused any widespread issues in the decades Wikipedia has existed.
2) All sources are cited so they can be easily verified by the reader.
Re:Substack Notes Launched
by two_handfuls on Wednesday April 12, 2023 @12:11AM
(#35534919)
The user experience with ChatGPT is pretty good. No ads, no spam results. There are downsides too of course: the hallucinations, and the way the ChatGPT site wants me to log back on now and then.
I was very happy with Google but recently on my iPhone the Google website started nagging me to log in every time I do a search. This is a poor experience, add to that the ad results that have gotten harder and harder over time to distinguish from real results.
Re:Substack Notes Launched
by emodendroket on Wednesday April 12, 2023 @12:27AM
(#35535008)
I’ve found it amusing but haven’t gotten that much practical use out of it. I still make multiple Google searches every day.