←back to thread

422 points simedw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.295s | source
Show context
qsort ◴[] No.44433579[source]
This is actually very cool. Not really replacing a browser, but it could enable an alternative way of browsing the web with a combination of deterministic search and prompts. It would probably work even better as a command line tool.

A natural next step could be doing things with multiple "tabs" at once, e.g: tab 1 contains news outlet A's coverage of a story, tab 2 has outlet B's coverage, tab 3 has Wikipedia; summarize and provide references. I guess the problem at that point is whether the underlying model can support this type of workflow, which doesn't really seem to be the case even with SOTA models.

replies(4): >>44433628 #>>44435758 #>>44436819 #>>44440998 #
simedw ◴[] No.44433628[source]
Thank you.

I was thinking of showing multiple tabs/views at the same time, but only from the same source.

Maybe we could have one tab with the original content optimised for cli viewing, and another tab just doing fact checking (can ground it with google search or brave). Would be a fun experiment.

replies(5): >>44434149 #>>44434300 #>>44434460 #>>44435067 #>>44439084 #
myfonj ◴[] No.44434460[source]
Interestingly, the original idea of what we call a "browser" nowadays – the "user agent" – was built on the premise that each user has specific needs and preferences. The user agent was designed to act on their behalf, negotiating data transfers and resolving conflicts between content author and user (content consumer) preferences according to "strengths" and various reconciliation mechanisms.

(The fact that browsers nowadays are usually expected to represent something "pixel-perfect" to everyone with similar devices is utterly against the original intention.)

Yet the original idea was (due to the state of technical possibilities) primarily about design and interactivity. The fact that we now have tools to extend this concept to core language and content processing is… huge.

It seems we're approaching the moment when our individual personal agent, when asked about a new page, will tell us:

    Well, there's nothing new of interest for you, frankly:
    All information presented there was present on pages visited recently.
    -- or --
    You've already learned everything mentioned there. (*)
    Here's a brief summary: …
    (Do you want to dig deeper, see the content verbatim, or anything else?)
Because its "browsing history" will also contain a notion of what we "know" from chats or what we had previously marked as "known".
replies(3): >>44435060 #>>44436146 #>>44437399 #
bee_rider ◴[] No.44436146[source]
It would have to have a pretty good model of my brain to help me make these decisions. Just as a random example, it will have to understand that an equation is a sort of thing that I’m likely to look up even if I understand the meaning of it, just to double check and get the particulars right. That’s an obvious example, I think there must be other examples that are less obvious.

Or that I’m looking up a data point that I already actually know, just because I want to provide a citation.

But, it could be interesting.

replies(2): >>44436420 #>>44440448 #
1. dotancohen ◴[] No.44440448[source]

  > Or that I’m looking up a data point that I already actually know, just because I want to provide a citation.
Or what were know has changed.

When I was a child we knew that the North Star consisted of five suns. Now we know that it is only three suns, and through them we can see another two background stars that are not gravitationally bound to the three suns of the Polaris system.

Maybe in my grandchildren lifetimes we'll know something else about the system.