searching a specific problem, on what search engine it is..

no satisfactory answer. what else is there? other than just asking questions on lemmy?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -16 points 1 day ago* (10 children)

Ask an LLM. Haters will tell you it'll just make stuff up but the answer you get is almost certainly correct. Just use your common sense to validate the results just like you would with a search engine.

Let there be downvotes.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    How do you validate the answers when you can't get results through something like a search engine?

    Why wouldn't you just use the validation steps to get the valid answer the first time instead of asking the bullshit machine first?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

    Not a fan of AI but i did use Duck.ai a couple of times and when i asked, it usually put the source under its answer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    There is an underlying issue with how AI presents sources in a way that doesn't make it clear why those sources were selected or if they are the current source.

    For example, one of the few times I tried AI the sources were older versions of documents not posted to the current website or in half of the cases contradicted the ai answer text. My favorite example is that it used a proposed law as a skurce for a change that never made it out of committee, but also included a link to the actual law that had the right information. A good search engine would just link directly to the law for the correct answer. If it was right a few times in a row I can see someone not checking sources after a while and that introduces a trusted vector for misinformation.

    At least with a search engine I can generally tell if the site in the results is reliable, like a university or known organization.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 hours ago

    Yeah, manual searching is definitely better in that case. AI could be use as a last resort if you can't find something or just a quick answer, and even in that, it isn't reliable much since depending on what AI is trained on and the company behind it. I.e save electricity, your time and use manual searching...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    Well yesterday I asked about near-extinct tree species that could survive in the climate I live in and when it gave me the names of those species I googled them to double check and to find out how much those cost. It pointed me in the right direction and I figured out the rest myself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago*

    It's certainly either correct or laughably incorrect. One of the two. Who are the boring idiots who don't love playing such a fun game?! And who cares how many rainforests we burn down too, right?!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    I test them every now and never just so I can be better informed when I call the utter shit (still deeply unethical regardless of quality of the results)

    I nce asked chatGPT to make me a 1000€ PC build. It told me that 16GB of DDR5 ram was only 90€, and provided me a link to buy it. To no Ines surprise the link had it listed for 400€. Also it game me a motherboard and CPU combo which were incompatible.

    Another one was that my wife was looking for a specific type of yoga classes in our area, but we could not find it. Asked chatGPT with the specific cities and country I was looking for it, and it gave me a link to a yoga studio in a different continent.

    If you still.have to validate the results with a search engine, what ianthe point of the massive waste of energy and water?

  • source
  • parent