The issue with direct LLM integration with web search is: They serve two different purposes. I dont search for things and want a GPT response. Likewise, I dont go to cahtgpt and want search results.
It might seem like a weird distinction but I use them differently and when you mush them together they become less useful overall.
Posting an error message into search may or may not get me a root cause or fix, but pasting it into chatgpt will very likely get me on the right track very quickly. Searching for a product I know exists is a pita on chat GPT, but a web search will pull it up pretty quickly.
If I search for a product, I absolutely DO NOT WANT A GIANT WALL OF GPT BULLSHIT before meaningful search results.
They are different products and have different use-cases. Stop trying to blend them! /rant
Makeitstop@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Google results have gotten less useful, but one reason for that is that there is an ever growing sea of AI generated articles out there trying to hijack searches. In a way, Bing is just cutting out the middle man.
I enjoy playing with ChatGPT as much as the next guy, but it isn’t a search engine. Hooking Bing up to an LLM just means that I now have to verify that the results it spits out aren’t hallucinations, assuming it understood what I was asking in the first place.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 11 months ago
It’s gotten less useful because everyone is paying insanely close attention to Google’s algorithms and manipulating them to get more attention. (SEO)
Makes total sense that other search engines with simply different algorithms are far more useful.
And it makes sense that Google maintains the vast majority of the market share when they pay tens of billions of dollars/year to keep it that way.
NightAuthor@lemmy.world 11 months ago
BinGPT took a list of restaurants gave me all their hours and then formatted it into a nice markdown table for me.
Only issue is that at least one of the restaurants had the wrong hours (though I believe this was because I included notes with each restaurant and they confused it)
Still, it was nice not having to do 20 inividual searches and do the formatting manually
Makeitstop@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I used Bing to get coordinates for every postal code in the British postal system. As long as I didn’t ask for too many at once, it would give it to me in a convenient table. And each one seems to have been accurate, at least for the ones I checked.
But on the other hand, I tried asking it to look up some Pathfinder homebrew, and even though it could give me the link to the exact document I wanted, and it definitely saw the content, it was absolutely incapable of giving accurate information. It would give statblocks that were formatted correctly but had the wrong numbers, and abilities that either shouldn’t be there at all, or with the right name but the wrong rules, either because it made up a plausible sounding entry or because it was bringing in the d&d version. I even tried asking it to tell me about a series of feats in one of these documents, and it would make up its own feats that matched the naming scheme instead of giving me the feats in the document it was referencing.
The inability to reliably quote things is a bit of problem for something that wants to be a search engine.
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
What i noticed with bingpt is that it can only handle stuff it can actually find. I asked it to look for open foodplaces while knowing they where all closed and it hallucinated three that didn’t exist.
Ironically the reverse, chatgpt with bing integration seems to do a slightly better job.