[visarga]

Google is toast. It has been in continuous regression for the last 10 years. On the other hand, language models are progressing by leaps and bounds.

It is likely that within the next year, a new open chatGPT model will emerge that is comparable to "ClosedAI", to be used as the next stage after search. This model, along with others in its family such as Stable Diffusion and Wisper may become integral components of browsers and operating systems and could potentially be used as the main interface for accessing the internet.

As people become tired of ads and spam, they may turn to language models as a way to shield themselves from these distractions. These local models may also serve as personal creative spaces, allowing individuals to work and explore ideas without outside interference.

[ben_w]

Google can trivially duplicate the research and compute needed for their own version of GPT-3 if they want to. Given the size of the company, I wouldn't be surprised if several people or teams have done so without them all knowing about each other.

Google also has at least two generative models of their own that they, like OpenAI is criticised for, don't publish "just in case"; one for duplicating voices, and the LaMDA chatbot that got in the news before ChatGPT.

People will get tired of ads, but I bet someone will use a text agent to rewrite stories and scripts so heroic characters always enjoy the great taste of $beverage while saving the day, the lead romantic opportunity is $consumer_gender_preference and likes wearing $fashion_brand.

[visarga]

Can duplicate, yes, but it's not going to increase their revenues. The chat interface is less profitable than the search box + ads. Search has reached a paradigm change moment.

[hakfoo]

The search concept might not be that disruptable in a lot of niches, because chat tends to provide an answer without context.

The traditional search-box-and-list-of-URLs at least provides attribution, which can be of huge value in some search scenarios.

If I have a health-related query, I want to see the links from research papers from legitimate institutions, or trusted authorities like the NHS. A human-language answer doesn't necessarily say "based on the groundbreaking research of wificausesherpes.com" at the end.

Any sort of comparison and recommendation searches are similarly iffy. That's why there are a trillion "best 8k webcam under $30 December 2022" affiliate-link-farm sites, but The Wirecutter and Consumer Reports still have some minor level of clout.

[dvngnt_]

google already has this technology and have submitted their own research. this is just hard to deploy at google scale. chatgpt is millions, google is billions and many companies rely on that entire ecosystem/ads

[htrp]

technically google can trivially duplicate this work with their own llms...

organizationally, google is a hot mess that can't even figure out how to launch a product

[dragonwriter]

> organizationally, google is a hot mess that can’t even figure out how to launch a product

Maybe, but for Google LLMs wouldn’t be a product, they’d be an algorithm behind the universal query box and conversational assistants, which are established products. Adding additional backing algorithms and changing output UI to prioritize their output isn’t something Google has a problem with, even if it arguably does with new product launches.