logoalt Hacker News

j45 • yesterday at 5:49 PM • 7 replies • view on HN

AI can definitely be a more natural experience for search, but it doesn't return better search results.


Replies

addaon • yesterday at 5:59 PM

> but it doesn't return better search results.

It doesn't /inherently/ return better search results, but Google is many years into an intensive project to make their search results so bad that even a magic eight ball, let alone a moderately advanced AI, can do better.

➕ show 2 replies
ge96 • yesterday at 5:56 PM

I have started to use the interactive Google summary chat, it's nice to have that initial search result context to follow up on with more questions

➕ show 1 reply
darepublic • yesterday at 6:04 PM

When I'm looking for info that requires careful parsing of a source site, then LLM is faster. If it's something like looking up the hours of a business googling that local business is better imo. Result is fast you get to see the business picture etc

➕ show 1 reply
cnity • yesterday at 5:59 PM

Search has moved on from tf.idf + pagerank at this point. And absolutely they do use things like encoders to produce embeddings that are used in retrieval.

➕ show 1 reply
JumpCrisscross • yesterday at 5:58 PM

Google search results are crap enough that someone only comparing them to various AIs may find the latter more natural.

spwa4 • yesterday at 5:57 PM

Yep, that's it. Search results are just such a bad example. AI just convinces you -falsely- it's results are good, but they suck.

➕ show 1 reply