• lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Didn’t know ctrl-f could parse natural language and not only rely on knowing the correct keyword. When did it gain that functionality?

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      Better question is, when did you lose basic keyword-based searching skills? I know you may want your answers on a platter but realize that there’s value in manual searches. Searching for something with LLMs on the page that you’re on is questionable on so many levels.

      • lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        There’s really not value in doing something harder, and if it was a one page thing that wouldn’t be an issue.

        Using their example you could get an LLM to return you the correct page in some documentation, searching through an entire site based only on a concept of what feature set you’re looking for. Ctrl-F cannot do that.

        • Lemminary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          12 hours ago

          It’s not harder, though, it’s actually quite instant if you know what you’re doing. A lot of documentation is literally one single web page, and the majority that is not can be navigated with the regular search and ctrl+F just fine.

          There’s no substitute to taking 40 minutes to get acquainted with the documentation to know what you need rather than trial & error your way through a problem blindly.

          you could get an LLM to return you the correct page in some documentation

          It’s unreliable and prone to errors, and I say that after using LLM-based searches for months at work. Too many times it confuses areas, makes stuff up, or cites some irrelevant page just to give any answer at all.

          • lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Than you’re doing it wrong, I use it for similar things and find it far better than previous methods and I’ve been doing this shit for 20 years now.

            There’s a reason why so many people are using it, it’s an extremely useful tool in some applications. It’s not perfect, but it saves a lot of time.

            • Lemminary@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              How can I possibly be doing it wrong when the page it’s citing mentions nothing of what it’s taking about, or when it tells me to do something that we as a company do not do?

              I’ve been doing this shit for 20 years now.

              Welcome to the club.

              it’s an extremely useful tool

              Sure, for writing letters but not for searching which is what I’m taking about.

              • lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 hour ago

                Because I go to the fucking cited page, I don’t rely on the LLM to give me the answer. It’s not different to using Wikipedia.

                Writing letters is the worst use for it, it’s not good for creative works.