Will LLMs make finding answers online a thing of the past?
-
prohibition of anything is usually a bad idea
Right. How about csam, incest, cannibalism?
-
Right. How about csam, incest, cannibalism?
Silly me, I forgot that running an LLM model was so similar to cannibalism.
-
LLMs are awesome in their knowledge until you start to hear its answers to stuff you already know and makes you wonder if anything was correct.
What they call hallucinations in other areas was called fabulations, to invent tales or stories.
I'm curious about what is the shortest acceptable answer for these things and if something close to "I don't know" is even an option.
LLMs are awesome in their knowledge until you start to hear its answers to stuff you already know and makes you wonder if anything was correct.
This applies equally well to human-generated answers to stuff.
-
As LLMs become the go-to for quick answers, fewer people are posting questions on forums or social media. This shift could make online searches less fruitful in the future, with fewer discussions and solutions available publicly. Imagine troubleshooting a tech issue and finding nothing online because everyone else asked an LLM instead. You do the same, but the LLM only knows the manual, offering no further help. Stuck, you contact tech support, wait weeks for a reply, and the cycle continues—no new training data for LLMs or new pages for search engines to index. Could this lead to a future where both search results and LLMs are less effective?
People will use whatever method of finding answers that works best for them.
Stuck, you contact tech support, wait weeks for a reply, and the cycle continues
Why didn't you post a question on a public forum in that scenario? Or, in the future, why wouldn't the AI search agent itself post a question? If questions need to be asked then there's nothing stopping them from still being asked.
-
People will use whatever method of finding answers that works best for them.
Stuck, you contact tech support, wait weeks for a reply, and the cycle continues
Why didn't you post a question on a public forum in that scenario? Or, in the future, why wouldn't the AI search agent itself post a question? If questions need to be asked then there's nothing stopping them from still being asked.
That is an option, and undoubtedly some people will continue to do that. It’s just that the number of those people might go down in the future.
Some people like forums and such much more than LLMs, so that number probably won’t go down to zero. It’s just that someone has to write that first answer, so that eventually other people might benefit from it.
What if it’s a very new product and a new problem? Back in the old days, that would translate to the question being asked very quickly in the only place where you can do that - the forums. Nowadays, the first person to even discover the problem might not be the forum type. They might just try all the other methods first, and find nothing of value. That’s the scenario I was mainly thinking of.
-
Silly me, I forgot that running an LLM model was so similar to cannibalism.
Thanks for showing that you have no actual arguments.
LLMs are inherently bad for society in their current form. They have no real benefit. They push capital extraction and further increase the pressure on workers. They have insane energy requirements, insane hardware requirements. We are working on saving our planet and can absolutely not spare the massive amounts of energy required for this shit.
-
If you cut a forum's population by 90% it will die.
This is one of the biggest problems with AI. If it becomes the easiest way to get good answers for most things, it will starve the channels that can answer the things it can't (including everything new).
-
If you cut a forum's population by 90% it will die.
This is one of the biggest problems with AI. If it becomes the easiest way to get good answers for most things, it will starve the channels that can answer the things it can't (including everything new).
Depends which 90%.
It's ironic that this thread is on the Fediverse, which I'm sure has much less than 10% the population of Reddit or Facebook or such. Is the Fediverse "dead"?
This is one of the biggest problems with AI. If it becomes the easiest way to get good answers for most things
If it's the easiest way to get good answers for most things, that doesn't seem like a problem to me. If it isn't the easiest way to get good answers, then why are people switching to it en mass anyway in this scenario?
-
Right. How about csam, incest, cannibalism?
arguments like this are fucking stupid
-
That’s exactly what I’m worried about happening. What If one day there are hardly any sources left?
At this rate that day is not too distant, I'm affraid.
I was expecting either Huxley or Orwell to be right, not both.
-
Thanks for showing that you have no actual arguments.
LLMs are inherently bad for society in their current form. They have no real benefit. They push capital extraction and further increase the pressure on workers. They have insane energy requirements, insane hardware requirements. We are working on saving our planet and can absolutely not spare the massive amounts of energy required for this shit.
Thanks for showing that you have no actual arguments.
You did it first by jumping to "think of the children!" And analogizing running a program to cannibalism.
They have no real benefit.
No need to ban them, then. Nobody will use them if this is true.
They have insane energy requirements, insane hardware requirements.
I run them locally on my computer, I know this is factually incorrect through direct experience.
Personal experience aside, if running an LLM query really required "insane" energy and hardware expenditures then why are companies like Google so eager to do it for free? These are public companies whose mandates are to generate a profit. Whatever they're getting out of running those LLM queries must be worth the cost of running them.
We are working on saving our planet
I see you've switched from "think of the children!" To "think of the environment!"
-
That is an option, and undoubtedly some people will continue to do that. It’s just that the number of those people might go down in the future.
Some people like forums and such much more than LLMs, so that number probably won’t go down to zero. It’s just that someone has to write that first answer, so that eventually other people might benefit from it.
What if it’s a very new product and a new problem? Back in the old days, that would translate to the question being asked very quickly in the only place where you can do that - the forums. Nowadays, the first person to even discover the problem might not be the forum type. They might just try all the other methods first, and find nothing of value. That’s the scenario I was mainly thinking of.
I did suggest a possible solution to this - the AI search agent itself could post a question in a forum somewhere if has been unable to find an answer.
This isn't a feature yet of mainstream AI search agents but I've been following development and this sort of thing is already being done by hobbyists. Agentic AI workflows can be a lot more sophisticated than simple "do a search summarize results." An AI agent could even try to solve the problem itself - reading source code, running tests in a sandbox, and so forth. If it figures out a solution that it didn't find online, maybe it could even post answers to some of those unanswered forum questions. Assuming the forum doesn't ban AI of course.
Basically, I think this is a case of extrapolating problems without also extrapolating the possibilities of solutions. Like the old Malthusian scenario, where Malthus projected population growth without also accounting for the fact that as demand for food rises new technologies for making food production more productive would also be developed. We won't get to a situation where most people are using LLMs for answers without LLMs being good at giving answers.
-
Thanks for showing that you have no actual arguments.
You did it first by jumping to "think of the children!" And analogizing running a program to cannibalism.
They have no real benefit.
No need to ban them, then. Nobody will use them if this is true.
They have insane energy requirements, insane hardware requirements.
I run them locally on my computer, I know this is factually incorrect through direct experience.
Personal experience aside, if running an LLM query really required "insane" energy and hardware expenditures then why are companies like Google so eager to do it for free? These are public companies whose mandates are to generate a profit. Whatever they're getting out of running those LLM queries must be worth the cost of running them.
We are working on saving our planet
I see you've switched from "think of the children!" To "think of the environment!"
You just showed again that you have no actual arguments. You're using populism to "win" against factually correct and provable statements.
Using anecdotal evidence is a cheap trick and I believe you know it. It's not evidence at all. Numbers show that I'm right and you're wrong in this case.
"Think of the children" is used as a thought stopper by the political right to push their laws against humanity through. It isnt as smart as you think to wrongly ascribe it. I was right and showed it, you cant live with it. Thats okay.
-
You just showed again that you have no actual arguments. You're using populism to "win" against factually correct and provable statements.
Using anecdotal evidence is a cheap trick and I believe you know it. It's not evidence at all. Numbers show that I'm right and you're wrong in this case.
"Think of the children" is used as a thought stopper by the political right to push their laws against humanity through. It isnt as smart as you think to wrongly ascribe it. I was right and showed it, you cant live with it. Thats okay.
Using anecdotal evidence is a cheap trick and I believe you know it. It's not evidence at all. Numbers show that I'm right and you're wrong in this case.
So... got any?
"Think of the children" is used as a thought stopper by the political right to push their laws against humanity through.
I refer you back to your earlier comment analogizing LLMs to "csam".
-
arguments like this are fucking stupid
Glad you agree. Non arguments are not a good idea.
-
Using anecdotal evidence is a cheap trick and I believe you know it. It's not evidence at all. Numbers show that I'm right and you're wrong in this case.
So... got any?
"Think of the children" is used as a thought stopper by the political right to push their laws against humanity through.
I refer you back to your earlier comment analogizing LLMs to "csam".
You know I'm right and try to troll because you either dont like it or have an agenda. In both cases, thats a you problem.
-
I did suggest a possible solution to this - the AI search agent itself could post a question in a forum somewhere if has been unable to find an answer.
This isn't a feature yet of mainstream AI search agents but I've been following development and this sort of thing is already being done by hobbyists. Agentic AI workflows can be a lot more sophisticated than simple "do a search summarize results." An AI agent could even try to solve the problem itself - reading source code, running tests in a sandbox, and so forth. If it figures out a solution that it didn't find online, maybe it could even post answers to some of those unanswered forum questions. Assuming the forum doesn't ban AI of course.
Basically, I think this is a case of extrapolating problems without also extrapolating the possibilities of solutions. Like the old Malthusian scenario, where Malthus projected population growth without also accounting for the fact that as demand for food rises new technologies for making food production more productive would also be developed. We won't get to a situation where most people are using LLMs for answers without LLMs being good at giving answers.
This idea about automated forum posts and answers could work. However, a human would also need to verify that the generated solution actually solves a problem. There are still some pretty big ifs and buts in this thing, but I assume it could work. I just don’t think current LLMs are quite smart enough yet. It’s a fast moving target, and new capabilities are bing added on a daily basis, so it might not take very long until we get there.
-
You know I'm right and try to troll because you either dont like it or have an agenda. In both cases, thats a you problem.
So I take it you're not going to post those numbers, then.
-
So I take it you're not going to post those numbers, then.
Of course not. It's literally 5 words in a search engine.
-
At this rate that day is not too distant, I'm affraid.
I was expecting either Huxley or Orwell to be right, not both.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Interestingly, there’s an Intelligence Squared episode that explores that very point. As usual, there’s a debate, voting and both sides had some pretty good arguments. I’m convinced that Orwell and Huxley were correct about certain things. Not the whole picture, but specific parts of it.
