tacking on a bunch of LLMs sure is a way to “make the web more human”.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s often not a choice between an AI-generated summary and a human-generated one, though. It’s a choice between an AI-generated summary and no summary.

      • noodlejetski@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        so, no summary at all, or one that does shit job pointing out important bits or gets them wrong and therefore isn’t a proper summary? choices, choices.

    • Cenotaph@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Kagi actually does an interesting implementation for their search summary and while not perfect, it is miles better than the alternatives in my experience. It uses a combination of anthropic’s claude for language processing as well as incorporates wolfram alpha for stuff that needs numerical accuracy. Compared to google AI or copilot I’ve been seeing good results.

      While it isn’t perfect at summarizing, I’ve found their implementation to be “good enough”, and it can summarize pieces near instantly, which I think is the place where it actually becomes useful. Humans may be better, but I dont have the money or time to pay a human to summarize pages for me to see if they’re going to be useful to delve further into.