Aren’t those citations sometimes entirely made up? Like the lawyers who used it for a case and it cited ones that never happened?

I really do think hallucinated references are a thing of the past. Models will still make things up, but they won't make up references.

ChatGPT with web search does a good job of summarizing content.

It invents citations too, constantly. You could look up the things it cites, although at that point, what are you actually gaining?

And I’m not saying this makes them useless: I pay for Claude and am a reasonably happy customer, despite the occasional bullshit. But none of that is relevant to my point that the bots get held to a different standard than Google search and I don’t see an easy way for Google to deal with that.

Do you pay for ChatGPT? The paid version of ChatGPT has had a web search tool for ages. It will search the web and give you live links.

ChatGPT has had web search for exactly 58 days. I guess our definitions of 'ages' differ by several orders of magnitude.

The paid version has had web access for at least a year

March 23rd 2023

https://openai.com/index/chatgpt-plugins/

That’s 666 days.

So you are off by over “one order of magnitude”

A plugin? You’re joking.

It’s a “plug in” built into the paid version of ChatGPT, run by default and created by OpenAI.

This isn’t a third party obscure plug in.

All “tools” use a plug in architecture

You're a troll, and I'm done feeding you.

What part is “trolling”? Paid users have been able to use ChatGPT using the built in web browsing plug in for over a year just by saying “please provide citations” or “verify that”.

What you say has been around for a few weeks has literally been around for paid users for over a year