> The most extreme I can think of is when I want to find when a show comes out and I have to read 10 paragraphs from 5 different sites to realize no one knows.

I found that you can be pretty sure no one knows if it’s not already right on the results page. And if the displayed quote for a link on the results page is something like “wondering when show X is coming out?”, then it’s also a safe bet that clicking that link will be useless.

You learn those patterns fast, and then the search is fast as well.

I don't disagree but having to have a learning phase for patterns sounds a bit like people clinging to an old way of things.

It’s better to have a pattern than having no pattern with ChatGPT to tell when it’s hallucinating or not.

I wish MLs were more useful than search engines, but they have still a long way to go to replace them (if they ever do).

Google still thinks I want to click on the sites I haven't clicked on in a decade even though they are first results. Search engines have a long way to go to catch up to GPT

You mean like prompt engineering?

What you’re describing as “clinging to an old way of things” is how every single thing has been, ever, new or old.

I don't know why you come here and say something so obviously untrue.

> The most extreme I can think of is when I want to find when a show comes out

Yeah, I find that queries which can be answered in a sentence are the worst to find answers from search engines because all the results lengthen the response to an entire article, even when there isn't an answer.

agreed on that antipattern although fwiw chatgpt is unlikely to know the answer for questions like these either.