• henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    This makes me irrationally angry when I’m looking for technical information. The preview looks reasonable. Click on the link, and it’s just word salad of technical terms, structured in an intelligent way, but completely devoid of meaning.

    Search engines are screwed, and possibly future AI training as well.

    • Showroom7561
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, websites designed as Q&As are the worst, too.

      The first few questions and answers make some sense, and then it just devolves into off topic nonsense that has some keywords you were originally using in your search.

      The problem is, if you don’t know enough about a topic, you can’t even assess whether it’s real or crap.

    • Empathy [he/him]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Ironically, the best way I found to combat this is to use search engines that summarize result pages with AI (e.g., Bing Copilot or Perplexity).

      It still sucks even with those options, but it at-least reduces the need to go through several pages of results before finding the first relevant one. Still, the LLMs of those engines hallucinate regularly and give very naive answers, so they’re mostly useful for finding relevant sources IMO.

      Disclaimer: I pay for Perplexity. I use Perplexity every day but I haven’t tried Bing Copilot that much. I haven’t used ChatGPT much, I find it way too unreliable, I can’t trust its answers. I’m not an investor nor employee of either.