Interesting, but I'm not totally convinced that searching for LLMs is different than for us (humans). In the end, we both want to get information that's relevant to our query (intent). Besides, I wonder whether there will be able to convince big players like OpenAI to use them, instead of Google Search with its proven record :)
nahnahno•59m ago
The fact that GPT-4.1 was the judge does not convince of the validity of the bench.
tacoooooooo•9m ago
it's an odd choice. I'd be curious why they picked that. it's not the cheapest, most expensive, best, or worst.
It does have a relatively large context window, and ime is very good at format adherence
hartator•48m ago
Congrats on the launch!
aabhay•40m ago
The latency of 5s for the basic tier search request is very confusing to me. Is that 5s per request or 5s per 1k requests? If it is indeed 5s per request that seems like a deal breaker
bfeynman•14m ago
the need for more web search indices is indeed dire given landscape with agents and providers turning into walled gardens means that independent ones are definitely going to be needed, but just seems insurmountable when building actual index is so costly. Maybe just purely pareto efficient of serving 80% of requests or something is good enough.
apsurd•12m ago
Human | AI toggle is cool.
Obligatory: information-dense format is valuable for humans too! But the entire Internet is propped up by ads so seems we can't have nice things.
BinaryIgor•1h ago