this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
1539 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
85355 readers
4187 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes, that is the problem I alluded to...
Quoting sources verbatim is text search. That’s the whole point.
You don’t need generative AI when there’s nothing to generate.
The AI is not just generative, once again, it is used to interpret the question and surface a specific answer to the question instead of just linking to the entire page.
Again, if the result is a quote verbatim, it’s just text search.
There is no difference between traditional search results, where a highlighted quote of the searched topic is presented, and what you propose.
You can keep repeating the same nonsense over and over and it doesn't make it any more correct. I've repeatedly explained how it's not the same.
First of all, you don’t have any notion of how LLMs work, so you cannot “explain” anything.
But even if you did, the idea that a LLM should just interpret a query written in natural language, and return the results for that query quoted verbatim from the source, is so close to how traditional search has been implemented for the past decade or so, it’s hilarious that anyone would propose an alternative to it that is ten times more expensive and not nearly half as precise.
Regardless of all this, “what if we had LLMs that quote text verbatim” is not an explanation, it’s wishful thinking. It’s like saying that if we had flying cars, traffic jams would go away, then proceed to ignore the fact that cars don’t fly, and even if they did, they would be way more expensive, and even if they weren’t, they would create other issues like the need for air traffic control. Silly ideas are a dime a dozen.
That's never how it's worked. Traditional search engines just point to links.
I’ll bite. How do you think a LLM could accomplish what you want to do without using RAG, which necessarily involves a search engine?
In other words, what you want is a natural language parser than then goes to a search engine and retrieves content from a website to construct an answer that must quote verbatim the site. Which is what they have been doing for years.
Also, search engines do quote websites, all the time. Are you stuck with Altavista or something?