• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    2nd panel doesn’t make much sense. Google was always an “AI” mixing ads into search results. There weren’t any humans. This is one algorithm (LLM) replacing another ( PageRank plus logic code ).

    • Ziglin (it/they)@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I believe the implication is that all humans at the company have been laid off. And PageRank was not neural network to my knowledge but I also don’t work at Google so I won’t say it’s impossible that they have been lying about that for some reason. At some point they started adding adverts and sorting results using a neural network, which one could argue likely works similar to the input of an LLM.

      The implication of the second is however that the content of the pages displayed as search results are being summarized by AI while incorporating advertising, making it impossible to separate the advert from the rest.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Oh sure the rest of the panels make sense but the second one is LLM ai vs traditional ai.

        PageRank was not neural network to my knowledge

        AI is more than neural net code. Chess programs used to be AI in the 1960’s. Pagerank and the code around it automated away Yahoo’s human curated lists.