Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mpzkl wrote

Reply to comment by TiredOldLamb in Why AI can not replace search index by shanoshamanizum

Show some examples so we can enrich the discussion.

−13

TiredOldLamb t1_j6mqcx6 wrote

Search engines are also designed and maintained by humans. They absolutely can filter the results to fit the agenda of creators. There were many examples of that with the Google vs China situation.

There isn't some great fairness ethos guiding the works of search engine creators. They can manipulate the results just as much as AI creators.

10

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mqirv wrote

It's more about the theoretical side of it. Because fundamentally a search engine can provide contradictory and self-excluding answers as is naturally gathered from people while AI will reduce that to a single yes or no. And that's the actual problem.

3

69like t1_j6nuf1t wrote

Oh no. You have to search for particular keywords or phrases, even just in your mind, to find the search results you want to find. With an AI like chatgpt, you can stop lying to yourself and find what you want, by prompting what you want to see. After all, knowledge is purely what you want to believe, not what everyone HAS to believe.

1

TiredOldLamb t1_j6mr7k7 wrote

Search engines are also designed and maintained by humans. They absolutely can filter the results to fit the agenda of creators. There were many examples of that with the Google vs China situation.

There isn't some great fairness ethos guiding the works of search engine creators. They can manipulate the results just as much as AI creators. It's all just some algorythms. All human creations are subject to the biases of their makers.

You seem to argue that AI creators are more likely to introduce bias to their algorithms.

10

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mrkv6 wrote

Not talking about correctness here but rather about reducing user autonomy by taking away choice.

3

Selfless- t1_j6mtrba wrote

Users are lazy and will happily trade autonomy for automation.

1

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mtxdn wrote

That's another topic which doesn't contradict with the core statement. We are trying to figure out if having something decide for you what to think is acceptable.

2

night_dick t1_j6onfyl wrote

I get what you are saying. Search results you can pour over multiple returns and compare and contrast to draw conclusions. An ai question answer engine gives you one result and you have to take it upon yourself to verify. I guess a parallel to look at is social media: TikTok/YouTube shorts are the most popular content delivery format atm and it is essentially deciding for you what to consume. So I’d say the majority of (young, probably) people are definitely willing to allow a machine to do their thinking for them

1

slimaq007 t1_j6mw031 wrote

Whole business model of most of currently existing search engines is based on presenting you results which will point you into direction of their business partners, buy stuff they produce, etc. That's business model of Google, Bing, and many more.

Compare search results of those two mentioned above. Then add duckduckgo and see

9

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mw2sv wrote

There you go - choice. Which doesn't exist with AI.

1

slimaq007 t1_j6mwa68 wrote

I have a strong feeling that there really isn't a choice and there is no free search engine nowadays. It's not viable for anybody to do that for free.

5

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mwf9z wrote

Can you host a website and get it indexed? Is that not free choice still compared to AI which cites only official approved sources?

Having a single source of truth has always been called dictatorship and censorship.

2

slimaq007 t1_j6mwu36 wrote

Read about SEO and answer yourself if you can index your website high in the ranks so easily. Most of search engines results ranked high are paid, so therefore are "officially approved sources".

Regardless of which, the term AI in this context is highly overused.

5

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mwyp2 wrote

The choice is there. I am not saying search engines are the best. All I am saying is the concept of user crowdsourced content will always be more real than an algorithm choosing from approved sources only.

2

slimaq007 t1_j6mxp0v wrote

AI can also be crowdsourced and managed in the same manner as search engine. Problem is bias is inherent to both of them. Webcrawler which indexes webpages for search engines with weighted algorithm giving your search engine results, and "AI" crawling web to find those resources for you (replacing natural language into query for weighted algorithm) is basically the same.

1

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mxsit wrote

Even if the index puts an article on page 100 I can still read it. With AI I have no choice.

2

bigUKRAINIANcock t1_j6mz3t4 wrote

Search engines hide many pages

2

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mz9yd wrote

We are comparing the concepts not the behavior of providers. Indexed content choice vs an algorithm choosing the source for you.

1

slimaq007 t1_j6mycww wrote

With crowdsourced open "AI" you would have too, given enough drilling from your side.

What you are trying to imply is that in search engine you see the results, whereas in "AI" you don't have presented where it found that information. So those should be presented in "AI" and the problem will be solved.

The point is, you already don't have that choice, there are pages which are indexed so low, you not gonna find them.

1

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6myliy wrote

That's still choice and I use it.

0

slimaq007 t1_j6n0083 wrote

And you can have this choice with "AI", just write one with open and transparent dataset.

1

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n0l9f wrote

This doesn't defeat the problem with something making a decision on my behalf.

1

slimaq007 t1_j6n11wp wrote

Chatbot with set of answer generators won't do it on your behalf.

1

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n15a3 wrote

How to explain it better. I don't need answer generators. I want raw content I can analyze myself.

1

slimaq007 t1_j6n1hli wrote

Then use search engine and believe in misconception of those results being unbiased and possible to find

3

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6n1mdx wrote

I don't need to believe anything else but the concept. Everything else is fixable and new providers are solving this.

1

ruferant t1_j6p896i wrote

This morning I googled 'is Athena Ishtar' and the first hit was for Ancient Origens an anti-science, for profit, borderline racist, lie factory, does that count? Are you saying Google picked that because it was the best non-biased resource? Definitely wasn't a useful reference and came in above all the anthropology and anyone associated with science or facts.

2

SvijetOkoNas t1_j6my49z wrote

Type in White Family into Google Pictures. See what pops up.

The do the same in DuckDuckGo or Yandex.

1

shanoshamanizum OP t1_j6mya35 wrote

That's exactly the choice you don't have with AI.

2

The-Unkindness t1_j6pceb2 wrote

So we can only ever have 1 AI company ever? What kind of logic is that?

Your initial argument is that AI systems won't replace search engines. Of which you are wildly wrong.

You then (laughably) assumed that search engines don't introduce bias. A completely absurd statement.

Now you seem to be arguing that there's multiple search engines companies but won't be multiple AI companies.

So you get tired from constantly picking up and moving the goal posts?

2

PawnOptikon t1_j6nqdnr wrote

You can pay to have your links shown above other ones, the introduction of biases in the result of search engines is actually their business model.

1