I remember estimates of the worth of each search to Google being 10 cents on average. Google does run Bert on many if not all of its searches anyway? And let’s not forget that searching the entire internet is not cheap either! Google holds the entire index in memory and every search hit goes through thousands of machines to return your results. In other words, running chatGPT might not exactly be a problem for google if it decides to do so.
Yeah, it's clearly lacking. Either de-indexing many pages or just blocking them from the results, even when I use double quotes.
Then I go to Yandex or something and voila, it pops right up. I'm not sure I care enough to pay for Kagi but there's something very wrong with Google (and DDG, and Bing, etc)
It’s definitely deindexing pages. It’s been years since I’ve been able to locate one of my old HN rants via Google Search when it used to be the first result. Before all I had to use was my username + a politician’s name that I’ve only ever used once. After looking up the comment with Algolia and adding more keywords directly from the post, Google just gives up
Genuinely curious, can you give both your name and the politician name in double quotes individually? Google has stopped requiring all terms to be present in search, this is a way of forcing it..
If I put the two words in quotes, the only result is this unrelated thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28162412 - I never replied in that thread, so it completely ignored my username despite the quotes but did contain one instance of the other search term.
Just double checked Algolia and I actually have three comments that fit the query. Two posted nine years ago and one posted ten years ago. It's been at least three or four years since I was last able to use Google to find my comment.
Edit: Turns out if quote the entire first line containing the name, Google finds the comment. It seems they're only purging parts of their index
Using double quotes used to do this...but for semi-obscure topics I notice Google search doesn't give a crap about the quotes, it'll latch onto one or neither of the terms.
I'd estimate that running a large language model like GPT-3.5 or Lambda is currently 100x-1000x both more expensive and slower to run inference through than a language model like BERT.
So deploying it at Google scale is not viable (yet).
There is also the question of incentives. If an LLM model can return exactly what the user asked for, where do you put ads? Before the answer, after the answer or inside the answer? Any of those is a bad outcome for the user wanting just the answer.
We already witnessed the failure to monetize Alexa with ads - in a purely question answering setting, users will not tolerate anything but the answer itself. Thus, the business model for this needs to be paid AI/search, and Google would be facing innovator's dillema. If I was writing a book about Google, I would love to witness the VP level meetings at Google at this moment.
I can easily see how to monetize it in a minute - whenever the answer involves a recommendation that has monetary value (a product or service) you get the option of choosing what product label to recommend and there’s the monetization angle.
Problem with this is a) product or service recommendations are a tiny fraction of queries and b) gpt3 and any llm would be pretty bad at doing this, because they would exclude any recent product/services (they are trained on data from 1-2 years ago) and c) if the output of llm is changed in a way to replace llm’s recommendation with a paid one, why bother with having a llm in the first place?
The question is: how does Google monetize chatGPT results? If the answer is right there on the page, what’s the incentive for anyone to click on an ad?
If ads were truly useful we'd click on them anyway. You may be looking for the answer to how to run a VM inside of ChatGPT[0] but the AI also knows you'd like a new pair of headphones so… two birds with one stone!
