points by brainwad 4 days ago | 0 comments
There needs to be retrieval, but ranking can be fully offloaded to LLMs and they would probably do better. Legacy search engines do both parts, and their ranking is highly gameable judging by how SEOed they are.
[–] Terr_ 4 days ago
[–] brainwad 4 days ago
Spoiler: regular search ranking doesn't see very many results, either. I mean, have you seen the results for a crowded query like this? They are trash.
[–] Terr_ 4 days ago
Yeah yeah, search is hard and gets adversarial, we already knew that.
What's missing here is your imagined alternative: What exactly are trying to propose where Google can ditch having a search engine, and why do you believe it work well instead of badly?
[–] brainwad 4 days ago
Well, for some factual queries it can just know the answer inherently. Plus you can provide it all the curated data feeds that currently back first party results. But most of all, if there's no simple ranking signals to game, then SEO gets a lot harder.
If someone searches for "mexican food" you require ranking anyway because you aren't going to load those ten bazillion hits into the LLM first.