• wurstgulasch3000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Here is what kagi delivers with the same prompt:

    NB: quick answer is only generated when ending your search with a question mark

      • potustheplant@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        And even if it’s showing the correct number, you can’t be sure how trustworthy the source is.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          This applies to any information though, it’s got nothing to do with LLMs specifically.

          • potustheplant@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Not really, no. Sources of infornation gain a reputation as time goes on. So, even though you should still check with multiple sources, you can sort of know if a certain bit of information is likely to be correct or not.

            On the other hand, LLM’s will quote different sources and sometimes it will only provide them if you ask it to. Even then it can hallucinate and quote a source that doesn’t actually exist, so there’s that as well.

      • wurstgulasch3000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        At least it’s citing sources and you can check to make sure. And from my anecdotal evidence it has been pretty good so far. It also told me on some occasions that the queried information was not found in it’s sources instead of just making something up. But it’s not perfect for sure, it’s always better to do manual research but for a first impression and to find some entry points I’ve found it useful so far

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          The problem is that you need to check those sources today make sure it’s not just making up bullshit and at that point you didn’t gain anything from the genai

          • wurstgulasch3000@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            As I said the links provide some entry points for further research. It’s providing some use to me because I don’t need to check every search result. But to each their own and I understand the general scepticism of generative “AI”

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              If you don’t check everyone source. It might be just bullshitting you. There’s people who followed your approach and got into hot shit with their bosses and judges

              • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                2 months ago

                There is absolutely value in something compiling sources for you to personally review. Anyone who cannot use AI efficiently is analogous to someone who can’t see the utility in a graphing calculator. It’s not magic, it’s a tool. And tools need to be used precisely, and for appropriate purposes.

                My plumber fucks up I don’t blame his wrench. My lawyers don’t vet their case work, I blame them.

                • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  It’s an LLM. Odds are it’s hallucinating the sources and they don’t even exist.

                  Know what does compile sources for you which are guaranteed to exist and be related to what you’re looking for…? A good old not LLM infected search engine.

                  If my plumber replaces their wrench for a rabid gerbil claiming it’ll be just as good I’m definitely changing plumbers.

                  • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Spoken like someone who never even tried to use an LLM and just parrots the bad things they hear online.

                    Lemmy is full of LLM haters, I get where they’re coming from but they take it to the extreme every single time.

            • ZeroHora@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              The sources are the same result of the search? Or at least the top results?

        • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          When I query an AI I always end with “provide sources and bibliography for your reply”. That seems to get better replies.