Comment on Linus Torvalds reckons AI is ‘90% marketing and 10% reality’
antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks agoIf you don’t feel like discussing this and won’t do anything more than deliberately miss the point, you don’t have to reply to me at all.
kitnaht@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
The content is not unavailable to search engines. AI LLMs simply are better at surfacing it.
antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Ok, but how exactly? Is there some magical emergent property of LLMs that guides them to filter out the garbage from the quality content?
kitnaht@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Yeah. Money. Google has an incentive to make search results less accurate to get you to click around and interact with more ads. As it currently stands, AI models aren’t inserting advertisements; though I suspect that’s only a matter of time.
antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
And that’s more or less what I was aiming for, so we’re back at square one. What you wrote is in line with my first comment:
The point is that there isn’t something that makes AI inherently superior to ordinary search engines. (Personally I haven’t found AI to be superior at all, but that’s a different topic.) The difference in quality is mainly a consequence of some corporate fuckery to wring out more money from the investors and/or advertisers and/or users at the given moment. AI is good (according to you) just because search engines suck.