It's unfair to compare LLMs to early or even late stage Google.

Early Google was a very simple keyword search engine. Entering a question would confuse the algorithm returning results that sometimes matched the lower value words in your question. It was slick for the time but would feel tedious today next to the simplified output from free and local tier LLMs.

The reason Google and the internet feels tedious today has less to do with Google's ads and more to do with the gamed page rank results, the mountain of ads you find on websites that have aggregated all of the content that used to be useful on the internet and the lowering of information quality over the years.

I think the comparison is valid.

At the beginning Google search was all about returning the best result,but that's ruined partially because they put ads over search results and because others learned to tricked Google's algorithm.

The same will happen with LLMs.

Maybe not both but at least one of them.

I'm already doing AI search optimizations and the early results are quite promising!

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/s/e5tOt2MRPC

Google didn't have 90%-as-good-as-Google locally running search engines to compete against, though.

Not 90% at all.

I get no good programming information out of local LLMs beyond the very basics, but I can always find books and PDFs from trad search.

How do you update the local running LLMs?

Google never charged $20/mo.

No one would pay it.

This is different.

I doubt Google search hardware was as expensive as ChatGPTs is.

OpenAI needs MS for support.

You know that’s because Google sells ads, not search, right?

B2B software always has a bigger upside than consumer software.

It’s difficult to find a response for this that doesn’t descend into sarcasm.

By revenue, Microsoft’s gaming business is roughly the same size as Salesforce and Intuit combined.

What you possibly meant to say is individual accounts always have a bigger upside. The world is changing.

I mean that if you are starting a company, as the young Google founders were back in the day, there is almost always more money in having a B2B model instead of a B2C model.

If you’re one of the biggest companies in the world, you can do whatever you want. Though I’d bet that Microsoft makes more money off of their cut from 3rd party games sold on their platform than off of the sales of their first party titles alone.

They ran it for three or four years floundering and if I recall tried to sell to Excite for $1M but failed before they bought Adwords and it started to work for them.

I don’t think it is some universal truth, but it was the reality of the time that people wouldn’t pay for search so they pivoted into advertising.