Basically, every search engine has incorporated LLMs and are shoving them down your throat. If we are talking about tools that I would find useful I’d rather have a reverse image search.
Edit: damn, that down vote hurt. Must be an llm developer, I guess.
Edit: damn, that down vote hurt. Must be an llm developer, I guess.
If you are accusing me, I would like to clarify that, as of writing this, I have not downvoted your comment [1].
References
Type: Post. Title: “I could do more with native reverse image searches then I currently do with LLM AI.”. Author: @[email protected]. Publisher: sh.itjust.works. Lemmy. Published: 2025-02-28T04:46:11Z. Accessed: 2025-02-28T06:14Z. URI: https://sh.itjust.works/post/33553357/16973103.
The score of @[email protected]’s comment shows it to have 2 downvotes (confirming that it has indeed been downvoted by someone), yet the downvote icon is not highlighted. Given that this comment is posted from @[email protected]’s account (@Kalcifer is shown to be logged in in the top right), It would be highlighted if @Kalcifer had downvoted it.
Basically, every search engine has incorporated LLMs and are shoving them down your throat. If we are talking about tools that I would find useful I’d rather have a reverse image search. […]
So, for clarity, are you saying that a reverse image search tool is more useful to you than AI integration, yet search engines are pushing for AI integration rather than reverse image search tools, and they may not have reverse image search tools at all?
I had no idea an llm could even accurately display sources. I guess I’ll try again but as far as I know once they have their training material they are seldom retrained. Seldom as in not real time.
Could you elaborate? I don’t understand what you mean.
Basically, every search engine has incorporated LLMs and are shoving them down your throat. If we are talking about tools that I would find useful I’d rather have a reverse image search.
Edit: damn, that down vote hurt. Must be an llm developer, I guess.
If you are accusing me, I would like to clarify that, as of writing this, I have not downvoted your comment [1].
References
No. Just in general. My comment was pretty non offensive and I was responding to a person asking for clarification.
So, for clarity, are you saying that a reverse image search tool is more useful to you than AI integration, yet search engines are pushing for AI integration rather than reverse image search tools, and they may not have reverse image search tools at all?
You got it, my dude.
What search engine do you use that has LLM integration but doesn’t already have reverse image search?
I had no idea an llm could even accurately display sources. I guess I’ll try again but as far as I know once they have their training material they are seldom retrained. Seldom as in not real time.
Why respond to a question if you’re just going to go off on a tangent without answering it?
I thought they were saying all llms have reverse image search integration.
You are comparing apples and oranges. That’s probably why.