When I tried it in the past, I kinda didn’t take it seriously because everything was confined to its instance, but now, there’s full-featured global search and proper federation everywhere? Wow, I thought I heard there were some technical obstacles making it very unlikely, but now it’s just there and works great! I asked ChatGPT and it says this feature was added 5 years ago! Really? I’m not sure how I didn’t notice this sooner. Was it really there for so long? With flairs showing original instance where video comes from and everything?
what do you mean? it’s like being angry that people bring up I googled something
Googling at least until fairly recently meant „I consulted an index of Internet”. It is a means to get to the bit of information.
Asking ChatGPT is like asking a well-behaved parrot in the library and believing every word it says instead of reading the actual book the librarian would point you towards.
Well now it’s as if half of the books in the library are written by the parrot. The librarian doesn’t know the difference, and keeps trying to make you speak with the parrot anyway.
I use it instead of search most of the time nowadays. Why? Because it does proceed to google it for me, parse search results, read the pages behind those links, summarize everything from there, present it to me in short condensed form and also provide the links where it got the info from. This feature been here for a while.
And it still gets shit wrong.
It’s all good, Lemmy users are strongly anti-ai and are genuinely learning right now that chatgpt, mistral, perplexity etc can search the web
Let’s just keep adding more and more layers like a game of telephone!
What do you mean?
Go ask chatGPT
I don’t use ChatGPT, I use LM Studio which runs Local LLMs (it’s like AI you can run locally on your PC, I have solar and a solar battery so this means there’s no co2 emissions from my queries, I primarily use this for coding questions and practice, translations from Russian/Ukrainian/French, practising french, etc), then I use mistral AI second (french based), then third perplexity (american)
I also use Ecosia.org for searches as well
I asked mistralai/mistral-small-3.2 to elaborate on what you said, Is this what you meant?
The phrase “Let’s just keep adding more and more layers like a game of telephone!” is a metaphorical way of expressing skepticism or concern about the accuracy and reliability of information as it gets passed through multiple layers of interpretation, especially when involving AI systems.
Here’s what it likely means in this context:
Game of Telephone Analogy: In the classic “game of telephone” (or “Chinese whispers”), a message is whispered from one person to another in a line, and by the time it reaches the end, the original message is often distorted or completely changed due to mishearing, misinterpretation, or intentional alteration. The user is suggesting that relying on AI systems to search, summarize, or interpret web content might introduce similar layers of potential inaccuracies or biases.
Layers of Interpretation: The “layers” could refer to the steps involved in using an AI system to access and summarize information:
Concerns About Accuracy: The user might be implying that each additional “layer” (especially when involving AI) could introduce errors, biases, or misinterpretations, much like how a message gets distorted in the game of telephone.
Hostility Toward AI: Given the context you provided (Lemmy users being “strongly anti-AI”), this comment likely reflects a broader distrust of AI’s ability to accurately and reliably convey information without introducing new problems.
In essence, the user is cautioning against blindly trusting AI systems to handle information retrieval and summarization, suggesting that doing so could lead to a breakdown in accuracy or meaning, similar to how a message degrades in a game of telephone.
LM Studio looks cool, but I wonder, why their GUI app isn’t open-source? Also their site has careers section, where do they get money to operate like that? Couldn’t find anything about their monetization model.
Then why are you defending it? Is it necessary for every complaint about AI to have a wall of text clarifying that when we are complaining about extremely common issues with AI that is being forced on everyone that we are using shorthand for those specific issues for those AI implementations based on the context of what is currently being discussed?
In this case I am specifically complaining about ChatGPT and similar implementations. Kind of like when I complain about IPA beers I’m not complaining about every single beer that has ever been made.
Yes, the summary is right but also extremely verbose and redundant. Like the first or very last sentence covered everything. Like how many times does it need to repeat the same thing over and over again?
We aren’t any a. I. We just ain’t lemmings.
I use a I as an inspiration. That’s all it is. A fancy fucking writing prompt.
You use AI for writing prompts? That’s pretty cool, a lot of people use AI for writing prompts, a lot of writers say it’s great for getting rid of writers block
google: I checked the listing of news sites to find information about a world event directly from professionals who double check their sources
chatGPT: I asked my hairstylist their uninformed opinion on a world event based on overheard conversations
I mean a moron could find the wrong information from google and your hairstylist could get lucky and be right, but odds are one source provides the opportunity for reliable results and the other is random and has a massive shit ton of downsides.
What if your hairstylist is on the Fediverse, avoids mainstream social media, and spends a lot of their spare time reading scientific papers?
Google results are like:
Is peertube compatible with the fediverse?
ADVERT
Introduction: A lot of people wonder if peertube works with other peertube instances…
ADVERT
What is peertube? Peertube was set up in 1989 by john Peer…
Pop-up: do you like our publication? Give us your email address.
ADVERT
Why you might want to set up peertube: peertube is a decentralised way…
ADVERT
Please support us! From £30 a month you can help us to write more.
Wat is the fediverse? The fediverse is a technology…
ADVERT
Articles you may also like:
ADVERT
So can peertube instances talk to each other?
ADVERT
the answer is yes.
ADVERT
In conclusion, peertube is very…
Comments (169)
John Smith wrote at 12:28 on Friday
Lots of legitimate concerns and issues with AI, but if you’re going to criticize someone saying they used it you should at least understand how it works so your criticism is applicable.
It is useful. Chatgpt performs web searches, then summarizes the results in a way customized to what you asked it. It skips the step where you have to sift through a bunch of results and determine “is this what I was looking for?” and “how does this apply to my specific context?”
Of course it can and does still get things wrong. It’s crazy to market it as a new electronic god. But it’s not random, and it’s right the majority of the time.
Right: it skips the part where human intelligence and critical thinking is applied. Do you not understand how that’s a fucking problem‽
Could you try to understand what I’m saying instead of jumping down my throat?
If I want to turn off a certain type of notification in a program I’m using, I don’t need to sift through three forum threads to learn how to do that. I’m fine taking the AI route and don’t think I’ve lost my humanity.
It might be wrong more often than you think
https://futurism.com/study-ai-search-wrong
IS wrong
Ftfy
Besides the other commenter highlighting the specific nature of the linked study, I will say I’m generally doing technical queries where if the answer is wrong, it’s apparent because the AI suggestion doesn’t work. Think “how do I change this setting” or “what’s wrong with the syntax in this line of code”. If I try the AI’s advice and it doesn’t work, then I ask again or try something else.
I would be more concerned about subjects where I don’t have any domain knowledge whatsoever, and not working on a specific application of knowledge, because then it could be a long while before I realize the response was wrong.
In this study they asked to replicate 1:1 headline publisher and date. So for example if AI rephrased headline as something synonymous it would be considered at least partially incorrect. Summarization doesn’t require accurate citation, so it needs a separate study.
OK but google (or ask your AI?) about AI accuracy. This isn’t the only source saying theres a problem with the answers.
LLM’s have been able to search the web for a few years now
The main one outside of ChatGPT is https://www.perplexity.ai/
You can also look at hosting your version with Local LLM’s:
https://olares.medium.com/building-a-local-perplexity-alternative-with-perplexica-ollama-and-searxng-71602523e256
Looking up a list of resources that you then evaluate yourself is very categorically different from getting an “answer” from a bot.