I think those are examples of AI prompts, not search queries. Searching sometimes requires effort even for simple questions. For example, if you're trying to find the word for an object, you might need to consider what sort of website might talk about that, how to find that website in a sea of SEO spam, and then read through the article manually to find the specific information you are looking for. Using an AI, you can just ask "what is xyz called" and get a quick answer.
You can find the answer this way if the query is simple enough, but in general, if you are asking for something specific or trying to retrieve a piece of information based on keywords it's not usually indexed by, AI will do better. For example, "how are large concrete piers supporting a roadway constructed on a 45 degree slope?" Claude gave me an answer immediately, most Google results for my first two queries weren't specific enough/didn't include all details. I'm sure Google could find the answer, but asking Claude is just easier.
yes, but was it a good answer? were any sources backing up the answer credible (or even present)?
I don't know why we are suddenly so confortable trading speed for accuracy. Rule 0 of optiization involves making sure the probalem is actually being solved.
I'm not a highway engineer. I only care that the broad strokes are correct because I'm satisfying casual curiosity.
> I don't know why we are suddenly so confortable trading speed for accuracy.
Googling something or looking it up on Wikipedia is already trading speed for accuracy because you'll be reading a summary/reinterpretation. If I really cared about accuracy, I'd be reading highway design and civil engineering journals.
