[bidandanswer]

> I don't need an LLM for that, just the right google queries do the trick.

LLMs are clearly superior at presenting the information and have tangible room for improvement, whereas Google has regressed over the last decade and is getting more brittle by the day.

Open technology (LLMs) are going to offer much more robust and reproducible solutions to such questions as "here are my symptoms, what's wrong with me?" than Google.

You can nitpick my statements all you want and I will probably agree with you, but the overarching takeaway should be that LLMs are a much better solution, especially for laypeople who cannot use Google effectively.

[pants2]

LLMs are excellent at presenting more common diagnoses first. With Google you can easily find some rare and scary disease that fits your symptoms, that trips up a lot of casual Googlers.

[rjzzleep]

Sometimes when you look at studies, those rare diagnosis turn out to be really common, just not part of the standard curriculum. In those cases LLMs perform more like a normal doctor giving you all the normal junk a doctor would say.

What google needs is a "search journals" toggle on its normal search, not related to scholar.google.com since those results are also different.

[kaycey2022]

You’re unlikely to find anything useful because everything has been SEOed up af. Useful results, if not already in the SEOed sites, are buried pages deep into the search. Content explosion did not start with generative AI, so search quality has been deteriorating for quite a while.