This really is an interesting development.

I'd really like to see how this will help sites with traffic. I suspect it may not, but it could be done.

It is positive. Anything that can disrupt the abusive monopoly of Google search is great news for webmasters. Maybe it will even force Google to do complete 180 and stop being hostile towards websites. Because websites / web-apps / web platform is so much powerful than any Q&A bot and Google has massive head start in this area.

The question is...will this result in more traffic from Bing? Currently GhatGPT does not link to outside brands and is not connected to the internet. The language model is trained on a dataset which is limited to up to the year 2021. I'm sure that will expand, but they have noted that connecting the AI to the internet would require huge amounts of processing power. So I suspect that this may supplement Bing's algos, or become part of the algo, but not supplant it. The real question is...will Bing be able to attract more users (or steal Google's user base) due to the improved search or the novelty of ChatGPT?

Monetizing any of it must be an aim of the owners and financiers: That may come later.

The real question is...will Bing be able to attract more users (or steal Google's user base) due to the improved search or the novelty of ChatGPT?

The problem really is unlocking Google from its stranglehold on user search. Whatever anyone says, for the average user, it's pretty much locked in on Android, and Chrome Browser.

I don't know why anyone would view this as a positive since chatGPT was built with _your_ content. No matter what you think of Google, the end game here will be to keep visitors on Bing. Your websites have already been absorbed into this thing (non-credited, I might add).

So what exactly is behind these positive vibes?

No one will visit your websites -- there's no need to!

It's absolutely no surprise the search engines follow the same paths at the same time. It's in their best interests.

Webmasters tolerated search companies incessantly scraping their content because they sent traffic in return. The moment the traffic stops, a webmaster would be wise to block them as the scrapers they are.

We value your content ~ Google

Time to prove it!

"© WebmasterWorld 1996-2023 all rights reserved." doesn't mean "take everything to teach your programs, then bypass us". Keep sending traffic or start sharing those quarterly billions in profit, maybe both?

I don't know why anyone would view this as a positive since chatGPT was built with _your_ content. No matter what you think of Google, the end game here will be to keep visitors on Bing. Your websites have already been absorbed into this thing (non-credited, I might add).

So what exactly is behind these positive vibes?

No one will visit your websites -- there's no need to!

For small subset of websites this might be the case. But for vast majority of sites - something that gives just an synthesized answer is no threat and no competition.

It will encourage users to think more in terms of websites - visit sites directly, favorite, subscribe to feeds etc.

Moreover - for answers that are factual, time critical and can't be synthesized (results from sports event page, for example), the answer might be direct regurgitation of some web page and this bot could give attribution / link to the source as well. The original source will probably display that info in much better format and provide related supplemental information, and users will have good reason to click that link and visit that website.

Maybe I am wrong in my optimism, but I find it difficult to believe that things can actually get any worse than they already are with all the throttling, widget spam, youtube spam, featured snippets, instant answers etc. I almost think it can only get better, not worse.

For small subset of websites this might be the case. But for vast majority of sites - something that gives just an synthesized answer is no threat and no competition.

It will encourage users to think more in terms of websites - visit sites directly, favorite, subscribe to feeds etc.

Exactly. And competition to G means good for people like us. Moreover, it looks really good so far. Very well planned product from Bing.

So, I signed up for the new Bing and I am now on the wait list. Microsoft is touting this as "the future of search," so we will see. I want to test it and see just how great it is.

I think the idea and implementation of an improved search will attract more users to Bing simply due to the novelty of ChatGPT. Some of these new Bing users may come from Google's user base, but probably not in droves.

As I'm sure you know, Google is also exploring its own AI-powered chatbot: [nytimes.com ] called Bard, which I'm sure will eventually be integrated with standard search results.

I have read that the AI in Bing is fast and handy but comes with some surprise answers and sources. If asked about unusual answers it can make up answers that are not based on reality. A review I've read gives an example where Bing's AI made up a story about Tom Hanks being involved in the Watergate scandal. You can read it (paywalled) at Washington Post: [washingtonpost.com...]

About the BARD AI - yes, we have a discussion about Google's experimental BARD introduction here: [webmasterworld.com...]



_{Sorry, Free link expired 2/26/23}

[edited by: not2easy at 1:24 pm (utc) on Feb 27, 2023]

Let's look at this from another perspective. Imagine there is a person who wants to become educated. They go online daily and read a LOT. They consume information from various sources and learn a lot along the way. This person is now becoming more and more intelligent. If someone asks them a question they can often answer it. Does knowledge gained from researching what others have published owe credit to the sources? Everything you know now, you had to learn from somewhere. I think this is very different to plagiarism. This is not simply going online getting an answer and presenting it to the end user. This is about using the information and understanding its language to be able to formulate an answer based on knowledge gained.

I don't think any of this is particularly good news for web publishers. We will need to wait and see.

Mack.

This is not simply going online getting an answer and presenting it to the end user. This is about using the information and understanding its language to be able to formulate an answer based on knowledge gained.

Mack,

Definitely, and I am wondering how high schools/secondary schools, colleges and universities plan to stop the use of ChatGPT.

If the application is a "learning" application and it collects information, deciphers it, understands it, and formulates a unique response, how is that different from me reading books, studying applications, taking classes, and conducting online research to develop my own whitepaper about something like "Cybersecurity and Applying Risk Management Framework Best-Practices?" Like you said, "Everything you know now, you had to learn from somewhere."

I hear there is at least one application out there that detects whether or not content is original or developed through an app like ChatGPT. I have no idea how you would detect it.

I am wondering how high schools/secondary schools, colleges and universities plan to stop the use of ChatGPT.

You assume they want to. You may not have noticed, but many schools don't test students very often. Testing is apparently racist.

Regardless, the answer would be simple. In class testing, in class assignments, and no computers or devices allowed in class.

As for chatGPT, it's a tool. Learn to use it like any tool. If you know it might give you misinformation, like a hammer might miss a nail, ask it again with slightly different terms, or re-adjust your aim with the hammer.

I'm not sure where "chatGPT isn't perfect, thus it is bad" is coming from. I'm just concerned about what search engines decide to do re: Website traffic.

Are they still a SEARCH engine when they answer queries and send little traffic? I don't think so...

You assume they want to.

I wasn't assuming; I've been hearing about some schools starting their bans.

ChapGPT In Schools: Where It Is Banned - [forbes.com ]

Schools Ban ChapGPT Amid Fears - [voanews.com ]

I think this is just the start.

Banning is schools is one thing, g wants to ban webmasters (site owners, whatever you want to call them, content creators) from posting AI as their own work. Some tools exist that can detect AI generation, though I don't know what the false positivity rate might be but, if we are to believe some of the things g has said, they will be taking stern steps and a lot of folks are going to get hurt, simply if there is a false positive.