Bill Gates Says AI Could Kill Google Search and Amazon As We Know Them - Slashdo...
source link: https://slashdot.org/story/23/05/23/2311223/bill-gates-says-ai-could-kill-google-search-and-amazon-as-we-know-them
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
Bill Gates Says AI Could Kill Google Search and Amazon As We Know Thembinspamdupenotthebestofftopicslownewsdaystalestupid freshfunnyinsightfulinterestingmaybe offtopicflamebaittrollredundantoverrated insightfulinterestinginformativefunnyunderrated descriptive typodupeerror
Sign up for the Slashdot newsletter! or check out the new Slashdot job board to browse remote jobs or jobs in your area
This yet-to-be developed AI assistant will be able to understand a person's needs and habits and will help them "read the stuff you don't have time to read," Gates said Monday during a Goldman Sachs and SV Angel event in San Francisco on the topic of artificial intelligence. Gates said there is a 50-50 chance that this future AI winner will be either a startup or a tech giant. "I'd be disappointed if Microsoft didn't come in there," Gates said. "But I'm impressed with a couple of startups, including Inflection," he added referring to Inflection.AI, co-founded by former DeepMind executive Mustafa Suleyman.
It will take some time until this powerful future digital agent is ready for mainstream use, Gates said. Until then, companies will continue embedding so-called generative AI technologies akin to OpenAI's popular ChatGPT into their own products. [...] He also likened the rise of generative AI technologies that can produce compelling text as a game-changer that will affect white-collar workers. Gates added that he believes that future humanoid robots that are cheaper for companies to use than human employees will greatly impact blue-collar workers, too. "As we invent these robots, we just need to make sure they don't get Alzheimer's," Gates said in jest.
Do you have a GitHub project? Now you can sync your releases automatically with SourceForge and take advantage of both platforms.
Do you have a GitHub project? Now you can automatically sync your releases to SourceForge & take advantage of both platforms. The GitHub Import Tool allows you to quickly & easily import your GitHub project repos, releases, issues, & wiki to SourceForge with a few clicks. Then your future releases will be synced to SourceForge automatically. Your project will reach over 35 million more people per month and you’ll get detailed download statistics.
Sync Now
-
›
I'd like to have a better search engine, but the ChatGPT needs to solve the problem of "confidently explaining completely false information" before it can replace a search engine.-
-
ok but then the question is why you need to read the MS prose in front of the answer, when you could have just read the answer to begin with.
-
Because it's way shorter. That's sort of like "why do you need to read the dust-jacket summary of the book when you could just read the book".
I feel like people are forgetting that the Internet is already full of crazy bullshit and if you want to verify the answer you have to follow citations. And most people don't most of the time but it's useful that they're there for those times when it's very important.
This debate reminds me of the "why would anybody ever use wikipedia when anybody can edit it" argume
-
It's really not. For example, I asked Google "How old is Nintendo?" and it gave me this answer [imgur.com]. Two words, correct and brief, no AI needed. I don't need to go anywhere to verify that it's correct, there's a high probability that it is correct.
-
Did google really link to that weird page (rather than some page within Nintendo's own domain, or wikipedia)? It's more than 2 words (22, actually), and completely besides the point. It's not even incorrect, as it doesn't talk about Nintendo's age at all. Useless!
-
-
-
I love it when people explain to me that Wikipedia must be wrong because "anybody can edit it!".
-
-
-
-
Bings approach just feels like a smart search engine. A bat conversation compared to ChatGPT. ChatGPT makes shit up, but that seems more authentic...
-
-
It basically is a search engine, but without any way to tell where it pulled the info from.
I don't think Gates' prediction about "you will never go to a search site again" is that insightful; I mostly already quit using search engines already. Their usefulness has cratered in the past 15 years. Part of that is the signal-to-noise ratio on the internet got way worse. But it's also Google catering to the lowest common denominator user. Boolean search operators were a great way to tune your results to usefulne
-
Except it also gives you a bunch of boiler-plate nonsense to read as well.
-
-
Why does it need to solve that problem BEFORE it can replace a search engine? I think that 80% of my existing search results on google get confident explanations of wrong information already.
-
Mainly because it presents itself as authoritative when it is not. Search engines don't present themselves as authoritative (although I admit sometimes in the "questions" section Google presents itself as authoritative when it tells you completely false things).
-
ChatGPT authoritative?
It's a chatbot?
I never understand why people have this expectation of perfection for AI.
The whole point of AI is dealing with imprecision. ChatGPT is at best like your buddy. You can talk to it. It may give you some good conversation. But it may also assume things, make up things, and go off on a tangent.
I don't get why people expect it to act like some academic scholar. Do most your beer buddies give you references including page numbers every time they are talking about some topic?
-
No. My "buddies" have a decent sense of when they know something. And usually they do.
-
-
-
Why does it need to solve that problem BEFORE it can replace a search engine?
Because in a search engine if you find something wrong with a source you are linking to, you can just discard that result and try the next best looking from the summary.
In a chatGPT style response, you ahem no idea what bits are fact and what bits are totally wrong, you can't discard false sources without sources.
-
-
If ChatGPT can automatically append "-quora" on to every Google search I make, I may think of switching.
-
The problem is solved with a graded trust system.
"When did the US Civil War end?"
Since there's broad presence of the correct data, it doesn't need to provide a bibliography (though one would be a "nice to have").For news and political infighting, ABSOLUTELY NO TRUST should EVER come into the equation.
Nor for any sources.
Nor "expert" testimony.
Nor even government input.It won't IMMEDIATELY eliminate the problem of blind trust.
That's going to take time. -
Before the internet, if you wanted to know something you had two choices. You could ask your aunt who always seemed to have the answers, or you could go to the library.
Turns out your aunt just confidently told you whatever nonsense she had been told as a child, and actually knew very little. The library was better, but many books were either out of date or contained inaccuracies, deliberate or accidental.
Now we have an even more dangerous situation where people think they can get the truth from the internet
-
-
All what is going to happen is that eventually, ChatGPT functionality will be built into the search engine, be it Bing's, Google's, or whomever's.
In fact, this is how Google got to be the leader of the pack back in the days of Yahoo, Altavista, HotBot, and so on. Google's search results were generally relevant, while one had to filter a ton of stuff with the others. All AI advances are going to do is just ass more features to the Google prompt.
-
Bill Gates still owns $12.6 billion worth of stock in the company he founded. Microsoft in turn invested billions into OpenAI. Of course he hopes it will displace Google Search and Amazon.
-
First, he never said it will be OpenAI. There are lots of companies jumping onto the AI bandwagon right now. Second, he's forecasting the end of search engines, Microsoft Bing is one them. So why would he have a vested interest in Bing being killed by some other company developing an AI assistant?
-
-
From the man who discounted the internet, another statement as interesting as his book I never opened.
-
In his defense.. once he realized what it was, he converted his whole company faster than just about any well established company of the time.
-
Which, if you think about it, is basically Bill's business strategy from the start. Neither DOS nor Windows were the first operating systems of their types, and neither were the best by any stretch. But he didn't need the best, he just needed something good enough to allow him to entrench Microsoft within the PC industry. When the internet threatened that position, he simply applied the same business strategy to entrench Microsoft in the internet.
He's never been a visionary, although he spends a lot of time
-
-
-
It's truly impressive what AI can do in many cases now.
But to actually be a personal assistant and replace search - that means it would have to be 100% reliable.
Right now you can't be sure at all some of the things the generative AI chat engines are telling you are even real. It will gladly make up facts wholesale, because it has no comprehension what is real and what is not.
-
That would be swell if your personal assistant ran locally and kept what you told it to itself. Unfortunately, what will happen is that it will report everything you say and do to its corporate master.
If you thought Big Data was aggressively invasive today, you ain't seen nothing yet. I want none of that future. Whoever comes up with the first personal assistant can shove it where the sun don't shine.
Also, side note: isn't Bill Gates supposed to have retired and busy himself spending his ill-gotten billions
-
Also, side note: isn't Bill Gates supposed to have retired and busy himself spending his ill-gotten billions on philantropic projects to buy himself a conscience?
Thankyou!
This is the thing that pisses me off even more about the Bill Gates vax microchip morons, they discredit being anti Bill Gates to a quite large extent. Fuck's sake the man's a crook and burnishing his reputation with the money. No stupid conspiracies needed.
-
Indeed. Runs locally, is secured against data-theft, goes into my personal backup and can be fully configured by me. Do not see that happening anytime soon.
As to BG, he is just trying to do some more virtue signalling and pretending he understands technology. Obviously he never did.
-
They promised "personalized" results (pinky swear) as an excuse to datamine a decade ago to turn what should have been one of the crowning achievements of mankind to little more than a Big Brother Skinner box with ads. Idiocracy was underestimating massively.
And with this next iteration of the web, maybe I can have search results equivalent to what I had in 2007.
Yeah, progress.
-
-
I'm tired of Amazon showing me shit I didn't search for. If I search for a specific model of ThinkPad, either show me that one or nothing if there's nobody selling it. Don't try to outsmart me by assuming I'd like to see a bunch of similar laptops, sometimes "no results found" is the correct answer.
Google does the same thing, by assuming you meant to search for something similar to your input query. No, Google, if that's what I wanted, then that's what I would've typed into the damn search bar.
AI is just going to make playing the game of getting a search engine to actually spit out what you're searching for even more frustrating.
-
I have no problems with similar products being listed after the exact match for generic items. Ideally with a divider with exact matches/'no matches found' above and similar below. Valid examples for a laptop would be the newer model of the model searched for or other models with a similar spec and price. What infuriates me is when searching for something like a #8x3" screw and getting all different sizes. Or searching for a replacement part for a specific model of something (such as a laptop battery an
-
I think you and I should have a beer and yell at clouds together.
Couldn't agree more...
-
For the life of me, I cannot understand how Amazon became so successful with such a terrible website. It is incredibly hard to find something when you know exactly what you want, because it's trying so hard to spam you with adverts. Even the general interface is just gaudy and bloated. It's like the anti-thesis of Apple style design.
Yet Bezos has multiple giant super yachts and rocket company so it's obviously working for him.
-
The Amazon web site used to be a lot better at showing the items users were looking for. Then Amazon decided to monetize search results directly, and the quality went to hell.
Still, it's hard to imagine that a personal agent will replace Amazon. Their primary advantage now is their huge logistics base. Smaller stores are not going to be able to fulfill orders from hundreds of warehouses around the US without charging more than Amazon does.
-
-
-
TV series starring Fry & Laurie, 1990s. Jeeves was Wooster's man servant who expedited whatever needed doing. Wooster was an irresponsible young rich person who was helpless without Jeeves.
Such servants were fairly common in literature, micromanaging the lives of their 'masters' and covering up their mistakes.
This is what I suspect Gates is referring to: a digital guide to getting thru life successfully despite your instincts that lead you down the wrong path.
But if it is true, it may only be available
-
The wealthy can already afford to hire a Jeeves...
-
-
Gates is still salty about Google about losing the phone market. Tough shit Bill, nobody wants windows on a phone.
-
Nobody wants Windows on anything. We just put up with it on PCs because we have to, but without that stranglehold on phones, there was no way in hell people would put up with it.
-
Meh, having been forced to finally give up my BB10 phone, I'd happily take a Windows phone over the mess that is iOS and Android.
-
-
This insight is from the same guy that told us 640K was enough. *head scratch*
JoshK.
-
Search results tailored to you as an individual... and not just to current cookies and generalized models... would be able to "encyst" you in a cocoon of lies and propaganda, essentially walling you off in a false world where the only probable responses are to do what the owners want.
-
The implications of "personalized search results" run way wider and deeper than just that. It starts with the question how it supposedly knows what my "personal" results should be. That information right there is already way, way more than anyone should be comfortable with sharing with some corporation, twice so a corporation that makes its money by selling your personal information (which, at this point, it's probably save to say is all of them). Then the filter bubble feedback loop you describe, which wil
-
-
I've researched and played around with a lot of AIs, including all the varies GPT models out there. It is fascinating technology. However, I heard the same thing from the last generation of virtual assistants. Amazon, in particular, made Alexa specifically for shopping and that crashed and burned spectacularly. So, I am taking all of these billionaire and corporate claims with a grain of salt.
-
It is actually one of the longest-running empty (so far) claims that the AI community likes to make. The personal "slave" they have been promising for as long as there is AI research. Never panned out and will not pan out this time either. The tech would need AGI to really do that and AGI is not even on the distant horizon.
-
A useful personal computerized agent is only five years away from successful commercialization, and has been for the last 40 years, to coin a phrase.
-
-
-
I started playing a video game called Guild Wars 2 (similar to WoW but no subscription and some interesting differences) and I've been having to learn about class skills etc. and I've found that what I would have done in a game like WoW was ask my guild members if they knew the answer. But now I've been asking all my questions to AI and it is giving me very detailed and insightful answers, and I find I'm asking less of my guild members. So there are other domains like these where AI is having an impact.
-
In response to multiple complaints that we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 25 results from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaints that caused the removals at LumenDatabase.org: Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint, Complaint.
-
How is an AI assistant going to replace Amazon? Is it going to magically build warehouses and shipping centers? Oh, Bill meant it's going to replace the Amazon AWS? Hmmm, half the AIs will be running on AWS. The web site? I still don't think so. The AI will just go to Amazon's web site and place your order from Amazon. Amazon is not a piece of software you can easily get rid of by circumventing it or finding a replacement. Believe me. I tried boycotting Amazon for 3 months and crawled back.
-
If ChatGPT or an equivalent chatbot can sell me a 10 pack of the cheapest, highest capacity, rechargeable AA batteries by simply asking it to do so, then it has my money.
Whilst I appreciate Amazon for what it is, it still can't help but show me every other battery type that I don't need, and makes the entire online buying experience a painful one.
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK