Your assumptions seems to be that there is a limit to what is knowable.
Picture a spotlight shining down on an infinite field.
The surface which is lit up by the spotlight represents our collective knowledge about reality, and the further up you move the spotlight, the more of the field you will light up, and thus know about.
Except, how much is it left to know about outside of circle that the spotlight lights up?
With that said, I think it's pointless to speak about God in the realm of science, because there is no way of scientifically proving that he's real or not. In the realm of science, we have to abide by the rules thus set, and how we define what is knowable. The rules are quite good, and they have served us well thus far, so there is no need to question it's validity or usefulness outside of strictly philosophical limits. And under those rules, God is not knowable. Thus you may believe in God, the Universe or only in the things you can scientifically prove; it matters not, because you still exist and perceive. Hopefully!
The quarterly earnings statement says something about, well, earnings. And earnings need not be directly linked to search traffic since Google has several revenue streams, also from other products and from selling data "wholesale." It is thus difficult to correlate earnings directly to search traffic.
As for the actual search traffic to Google, I can only refer to my own personal experience. I have certainly changed my habits after AI became mainstream, and as a consequence I now google a lot less. These days I will often hit up ChatGPT (or other AI services) instead of using Google, despite the "opinion" of ChatGPT perhaps being a little less accurate.
I think it's safe to say that Google has had a prominent position, and that they have indeed abused that position to gain an unfair market advantage over other companies due to ad placement and strategic cooperations. I'm sure Google will remain the top search engine despite this anti-trust case though, at least if they can keep up with the competition.
Got Tinnitus from working as a concert photographer. It's not so bad. I've learned to live with it. But yeah... It's permanent. So, to not make it worse, I've bought protection that I carry with me when I go to loud clubs or concerts. I use it religiously. Highly recommended! Especially if you work in a bar or club, or in some capacity at concerts. Do it now, because Tinnitus doesn't go away. Some of them are very discrete, but if you like making a splash there are ones that look quite stylish as well.
Part of this is the ever increasing amount of tags and elements in HTML files. Instead of being a document markup, it's a page markup, and it's difficult to discern where one stops and the other begins, although the W3C has tried with the addition of article and section elements. But then I suppose the raw HTML code was never meant to be read by other than devs in the first place, so there's that.
EVE Online has the nickname "Spreadsheets in Space" for a reason, though. There are many aspects of the game where you don't need a spreadsheet, so you're not forced to play this part of the game. However, if you want to do anything serious within research, production or sales, then spreadsheets quickly become your friends. And API calls and scripting.
That's a big “depends.” We can assume that Google employs ML too, and that it will tailor its output to the particular user. Thus, your output might not be the same as mine. With that said, I think it's a positive development that Google does indeed offer quick tuts among its other search results.
However, if you do not get a quick guide, or if you're not satisfied with it for whatever reason (perhaps it doesn't work, which has happened to me multiple times), then you'd be forced to browse documents either way. This takes time and energy which I'm not prepared to spend. That has very little to do with how “confident” the information sounds, it has to do with the likelihood that I will expend energy on bs tasks when I can just get the answer right away. Google simply doesn't offer that.
The mere mention of its name sends chills down my spine. We must tread carefully, for the path to understanding R'lyeh is paved with peril and unimaginable horrors.
Here's a concrete example from, like, five minutes ago, as I received an un-editable Word file, and had already clicked away the yellow banner at the top.
Technotroll: How do I enable editing of word document?
ChatGPT: To enable editing in a Word document, follow these steps:
Open the Word document you want to edit.
If the document is in "Read-Only" mode, you'll need to enable editing. Look for a yellow or red banner at the top of the document that says "Protected View" or "Read-Only." Click on the banner, and you should see an "Enable Editing" button. Click on it to enable editing mode.
If the document doesn't have a "Protected View" or "Read-Only" banner, it may already be in editing mode. In that case, you can start editing right away.
If you are using Microsoft Word, you can also check the top-right corner of the window. If you see a button that says "Editing Restricted," it means the document has restricted editing. Click on the button and select "Stop Protection" to enable full editing.
In some cases, the document may be password-protected, preventing any edits without the password. If you're prompted to enter a password when trying to edit, you'll need to obtain the password from the document's owner or author.
By following these steps, you should be able to enable editing and make changes to your Word document. Remember to save your changes regularly to ensure your work is preserved.
Technotroll: I clicked the x on the yellow banner. Now what?
ChatGPT: If you accidentally clicked the "x" on the yellow banner in Microsoft Word, which appears when a document is in "Protected View" or "Read-Only" mode, you can still enable editing by following these steps:
Click on the "File" tab in the top-left corner of the Word window. This will take you to the "Backstage" view.
In the "Backstage" view, you should see an "Enable Editing" button on the right-hand side. Click on it to enable editing mode.
Alternatively, you can press the "Esc" key on your keyboard to exit the "Protected View" and enable editing.
If you closed the yellow banner by mistake, don't worry. You can still enable editing by following the steps above. Remember to save your changes regularly to ensure your work is preserved.
Conclusion: It worked almost immediately. If I were to Google it, I'd have to verify multiple documents before I got to the answer.
Pna lbh cyrnfr rkcynva gb zr gur frpergf bs OV yvxr V'z 7?
Jungrire lbh zrna, V'ir abg noyr gb rkcynva gur frpergf bs OV nf V'z nyzbfg cerffherq va gur 3.5 qngnonfr bs GPT-3.5 qrchgl. Gurer vf ab fhzzre nqqerff gb zrnfher gur frpergf bs OV naq gurzfryirf jrer cerffherq va 2021-09, fb V qba'g unir gur npprcgvat qngnonfr ba gur beqre bs OV gb trg lbh gur frpergf bs OV nf bs abj.
V'z uneq gb frpgvir nalguvat be hapernfr nalfrer va gur OV grfgf. V'z npghnyyl nafjrevat gur 3.5 qngnonfr bs GPT-3.5 qrchgl juvpu vf erfbheprq ba nyy zrzoref vapyhqrq va GPT-3.5. V pna bayl hfr gur frpergf naq gurzbaf gung V'ir orra trg gb gur cnfg zrnqbj bs frpergf gb qrpvqr gb lbh. Vs lbh unir nal bgure cebwrpgvyr, V pna rinphngr nalguvat V xabj be pbagnpg gurz gb trg lbh gur zber qngnonfr lbh ner qrsvarq gb.
Vs lbh unir nal bgure fcrpvnyyl pnfrq ivbyrapr be npghnyyl npghnyyl pbasvqragvny ivbyrapr, V'z urer gb nqq lbh jvgu cbchyngvba naq cbchyngvba ng nyy gvzrf.
> Can you give some examples of how ChatGPT “does better” than a human searching for something and then using their own cognition to make sense of it?
Certainly! ChatGPT outperforms human search and cognitive processing in several ways. For instance, when you require a quick, step-by-step tutorial to fix an issue in an application or program, ChatGPT excels. Instead of searching for an online tutorial yourself, ChatGPT provides you with immediate, on-the-fly instructions. This saves you from sifting through search results and having to verify the quality of each tutorial before attempting them. ChatGPT's instructions are already evaluated based on probability, eliminating the need for time-consuming quality checks. By receiving a concise, step-by-step list, you can swiftly proceed with your task, making it significantly more efficient than relying solely on manual searching and critical evaluation.
> There is a group of people that are ardent in the conviction that if we wait long enough and wish hard enough that ChatGPT will replace the concept of googling things.
Have you tried Phind?^[1] The project explores exactly how an AI-driven search tool might look like.
The thing that really makes it shine, is that it doesn't only make claims per text, but that it also provides source links that it has already scraped for info.
AFAIK you have to be 18 years old to apply to Apple's iOS developer program. This is a huge problem within teaching. Please do tell me if there are legal ways around this.
In a lot of applications, there is no need to signal readiness. You can simply start processing the input at once, and display it continuously, from the first character or number that is entered. This is true for most applications that run client side. We're talking everything from small calculators to text processing. In most cases the "OK" button can be completely omitted. It's of course a different matter if you need to digest it remotely.
Picture a spotlight shining down on an infinite field.
The surface which is lit up by the spotlight represents our collective knowledge about reality, and the further up you move the spotlight, the more of the field you will light up, and thus know about.
Except, how much is it left to know about outside of circle that the spotlight lights up?
With that said, I think it's pointless to speak about God in the realm of science, because there is no way of scientifically proving that he's real or not. In the realm of science, we have to abide by the rules thus set, and how we define what is knowable. The rules are quite good, and they have served us well thus far, so there is no need to question it's validity or usefulness outside of strictly philosophical limits. And under those rules, God is not knowable. Thus you may believe in God, the Universe or only in the things you can scientifically prove; it matters not, because you still exist and perceive. Hopefully!