>>108626732Not really, what changed is what they think will generate the most money. In the past they thought quality would do that. Nowadays every single company realized it's all about hyping the next big thing and milking the customers.Props to 4chin for unbanning my IP so I can spread more knowledge online
>>108626732the ai isn't actually wrong though. the humans it's pulling information from are.
I remember being told in school that 99% right is 100% wrong. What happened to that mentality in programming?
>>108626732AI is an improvement, faggot. Don’t you like it? Make your own search engine
>>108626772It's pretty reasonable with widely available info though. It starts to shit itself the moment it has to reason or the topic isn't that common. LLMs are good at summarizing stuff. Any more than that there's guaranteed hallucination.
>>108626776cancerous chinese/indian parent mentality. if regular human drivers have a 0.9% chance to get into a car accident per year but robot drivers only have a 0.3% chance people still throw out the robot driver and disparage it because it's not 0%. you guys are absolute plagues on society.
>>108626732The dude is being melodramatic. It's just a cheap model that spits out a summary of some top results for the query. Half the time I ignore it, otherwise I treat it like an opinion that can be wrong, not gospel truth. Saying "error rate" seems wrong to me, an error would be a technical issue causing it to fail to produce a result at all.
>>108626732Oh god WHATEVER just take another $500 million
>>108626791Boo, get a better material
>>108627043
>>108626776We're still trained on the concept of the "Five nines". As in 99.999% accuracy rate MINIMUM for all tasks. With the final .001% being an accounted for variable that does not matter much.Who cares though money printer go brbrrrrrbrbrrrrrrr QA jeet go saarsaaaaar
>>108627043Grow a pair, Faggot.
>>10862673290% percent is to generousIf they actually counted low quality sources
>>108626791> AI is an improvementTechnically true, but only because the search functionality was completely crippled to the point of being completely useless. Google from 2010 would crush current AI in terms of useful information retrieval.
>>108626810Ask me how I know nothing you work on is important.
>>108627617actually true but also only true because the internet wasn't fully flooded by worthless ai slop. If you brought in old google and applied it to today you'd probably get to see just how worthless 99% of the web has become with an honest crawling and indexing of all the utter shit that's been pumped out there now.
>>108627634and yet bytedance still gives me a 900k tc
>>108627646Web slop mind poison is the least important kind of programming that ever existed. Enjoy your failure rate.
>>108627640Its not just because of ai slop. Google was purposely crippled at least a couple of years before the ai slop era.I believe the willful destruction of google may have been related to trump being memed into office, it was decided that the internet was too powerful, so it had to be crippled to prevent anything like that from happening again.
>>108627695It's not and it's never that complex. The search engine being made intentionally shittier made them more ad revenue.
>>108627768Given how utterly worthless google is now, I imagine it won't be much longer until that plan really backfires. Google went from a near supernatural oracle, to utterly worthless. There is no reason for people to even go to google anymore, besides force of habit.
>>108626810I will happily disparage the 0.9% of humans that are at fault in an accident as well. Two things can be bad at the same time
>>108627695You have major rose tinted glasses.
>>108626772It's job is to do what you say. If it cant parse the information, and presents something that's not accurate, then it's wrong. It failed at the job.
>>108627863Possibly a little. But the degree to which google has gotten worse is profound. Its not a small thing. It literally does not function anymore. You telling me I have rose tinted glasses is like telling a quadriplegic they were not as athletic as they remember. Even if that is the case, the fall is still real and massive.
>>108626732I'll wager that estimate is cooked, it's probably 90% accurate on some subset of searches.
>>108626732Google search has never been 90% accurate
How would anyone know? Google is so shit I can't imagine using it for anything.
Google reverse image search claims this is a real story
>>108626776Move fast and break things.
>>108626772It's still annoying when you ask a yes or no question about a niche subject, and it says "yes" then repeats your question. Then when you look at the source, it's a reddit post with 3 upvotes making an unsubstantiated claim with no source. It's literally fake news.
>>108626732Pharmaceuticals get pulled for a 0.01% "error" rate.
>>108627043>get a better materialSAAR
>>108628177Dead internet theory. AI comes up with content and another AI reports on it.
>(((trustworthy sites)))
>>108626772Yes, it is wrong, it literally makes things up that are wrong. It doesnt just repost things some human wrote somewhere, it can literally hallucinate stuff.
>>108626810Humans can be better drivers. Robots will consistently deliver 0.3% crashes
>>108627768I don't use google anymore.If you use brave, it defaults to the brave search, which is just as good (bad). DDG is also used a lot now, again just as good. Bing is the default in edge. Also just as good as google and no need to switch away from the default.How does this situation help them make money?I think that not a single big tech company cares about income. They are all too-big-to-fail government adjecent entities.
>>108627617trvke
>>108627640no. it was not true because the net wasnt ai slopped.the google engine broke before ai started in. Some would say it was SEO , some would say it was clickbait article explosions, but i think personally it was because they genuinely made their engine worse.they decided that your too stupid to know how to search apporpiately and enabled some sort of shoehorn that pushes all terms into more general ones to bring up the most generally widely searched results possible. like a internalized autocorrect babby rails, to help the retards find instagram.
>>108626732Dumb pre AI, you had google searches that were unhelpful. That may be due to search management, but even before the changes that trashed their search, the original search engine of the 2010s were still not accurate enough and couldnt find what you were looking for often enough. So 90% chance of getting accurate answer in 1 shot is excellent.Across all metrics AI has improved their product line accuracy. Google translate used to be a complete joke, its now gotten slightly better. Google had no CC or audio dub before, but now they have multi lingual AI translated subs and audio dubs that even slightly matches the speakers voice in multiple languages. They had no OCR before, and now due to AI very accurate and useful tool.
>>108628741litterally you just needed to learn how to use search functions better. not even hating on you. "" + - were godlike powers and that was only the start of the curve. its why they simplified it for the simpletons
>>108626772>it's not wrong, it's just incorrect
>>108628764>you just needed to learn how to use search functions betterSame can be applied to AI as well. Thats what people did and todays thats how people should do with AI as well. No one promised any perfection at any point in any place anywhere in history of technology. All tech had to be maintained. Its just less maintenance and more quality output today. Veneer of perfectionism is just strawman argument coming from anti-AI ideological position.
>>108628786hey im not saying ai worse/better.ive stayed out of that because my feelings on it are complex and kinda go both ways depending on the specifics. just to make that clear.but yeah agreeable. all I care is that the base search i used is now so ass that theres nothing we can do to replicate what it was. Its kind of fucking up the way the networking of new site finding / tech diagnostics/fixing kind of searches worked overall too. I think its helping lead tward this kind of stagnation in the nets natural decentralization cycles.
AI apologists are so fucking weird. It's like they're talking about a beloved family pet or something or their retarded child. It's very parasocial.
>>108628807Not to mention how emotional they get whenever someone isn't interested in AI. They REALLY need that consensus.
>>108626791The Bosroach (or should I say Indian, saar?) cat spammer is back, unceremoniously. You truly are a glutton for punishment.
>>108628812Consensus is already here among the people who actually matter like governments and corporations
>>108628878Consensus is only relevant for those that make and use the product. Sideline deriders never mattered in history. Luddites all eventually use the technology they claim to hate or die off being irrelevant to history
>>108628972Meganigger tech-illiterate take.
>>108626732>"trustworthy sites"lollmao
>>108626732It's not Google, it's the world. The slop era is showing us the unfortunate truth that "good enough" is actually good enough. It's showing us that things like code quality and design and licenses don't actually matter. Quality doesn't really matter and if everything looks the same it doesn't really matter.The answer to issues with slop is unironically to throw more slop at it. That is how Anthropic works (from the leaks it was very obvious Claude Code was slopped) and they're generating billions with their slopped product even if the company itself is still very in the red.
>>108626791>AI "chad">inferior in every way to anyone with a skill also using the AI (they can actually fix problems instead of just running out of model usage time failing to fix them)I don't even need to go in on the luddite angle here, if people willingly post about how AI makes them "better than other people at long last" I just feel sad for them.
>>108628428yes opinions being presented as fact is a big problem. reddit being used a source is a major problem. statements on the internet are treated as facts by ai.
>>108628428>>108629156>reddit being used a source is a major problem.you are science-denying nazis
>>108626776a computer can be programmed to be 100% right, you wouldn't accept a calculator that gave you wrong outputs once every now and then
>In the past they thought quality would do that. Nowadays every single company realized it's all about hyping the next big thing and milking the customersnever at one point in time companies were interested in selling quality product that would make less money than a half baked shit
>>108626732Use your own brain.High accuracy will also have a cost.You will probably give something up for it.
>NOOOOO the free AI is only 100x smater than me, it is SLOOOOP
Are there any jobs where a 90% success rate is good enough? Even messing up someone's order as a burger flipper causes problems
>>108629491>Are there any jobs where a 90% success rate is good enough?Yes, working at Google on AIIf you disagree shut up it's free + AI is better than you + make your own AI + I'd be fine if 1 post in every 10 I make in 4chan simply did not get through 4chan is free too
>your employee lies to you 1 out of 10 times you ask if they've done the work necessary for you to profit>your wife lies to you 1 out of 10 times you ask her a question about where she's beenit's a huge number. you wouldn't accept it in so many other situations, but somehow it's OK for AI to do it. and yet, they want these models to control cars and write code that goes into all kinds of important shit.
>>108627977The entire internet is full of garbage now.We're talking literally 100,000x more websites to index, with only 0.001% of them containing any signal, the rest being pure SEO noise.The reason search engines used to work well was that the ratio of signal:noise was way way way way way way way way way higher on the old internet.
>>108627888wrong
Google AI still doesn't let me create a video of me violently sodomizing the chubby girl who rejected me in college.So for all I care, it is useless.
>>108628807its advertisers
>>10862949190% would shut down a company in a day, imagine 10% of cars that come off an assembly just don't startthe basic minimum to even slightly be acceptable is 3 sigma (99.7%) and even that is pretty lowAI has to be 99.985% accurate or it's useless as it is also tuned to never question itself unless asked
>>108629831There used to be shit tonnes of SEO garbage on the old internet too. The problem with modern google is it shows you basically no results. Back in the day, you could skip over the junk, and find what you were looking for, modern google does not even try, it shows you fuck all. The internet feels so empty now. Gone are the days when google would show you hundreds of pages of results for basically any search string. If something existed somewhere, it could be found. Sure it took some effort, but you were searching the entire internet so it was meant to take time. Now google returns nothing.
>>108630119>shit tonnes of SEO garbage on the old internet tooLiterally 5 orders of magnitude less.
>>108629866>acting like that waiter "subtly" asking for tipsIf the customer asks for something, and you didn't get it, you're a failure.
>>108626732you have to take the lie detector approachhit it a couple of time with same but rehashed questions
>>108626776>meanwhile passing grade is 60%
>>108626732>10% error rate would never have been tolerated by google pre-AI>t. never used google pre-AI
>>108627863google image search was incredible up to like late 2010s then they intentionally crippled it and made it basically a crapshoot.
>>108626776>datacenter go burrrrrrrrr
>>108628591>DDG is also used a lot nowIsn't ddg just bing with some supposed "privacy layer" that doesn't actually do much?
>>108630261Image search is a totally different animal.They actually did change that one due to the copyright lawsuit from Getty Images.https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/internet-rages-after-google-removes-view-image-button-bowing-to-getty/
>>108626732I think Google jumped the shark when they dropped the don't be evil motto.
>>108628719When did google stop supporting negatives and exact string searches?I remember at some point I would try to exclude something and it would then give me links with that term in the title and other frustrating shit.
>>108630119Google went from functional to basically unusable in the span of just a few years. Do you really think the amount of CEO went up 5 orders of magnitude over the space of a few years. And besides that does not justify them crippling the ability to find obscure information. Maybe it does not effect you being you clearly never used google for anything actually hard to find. But when searching for extremely obscure information modern google is utterly worthless. I search in quotes for strings I absolutely know exist on the internet, and it turns up nothing. It never used to be like that.
