Search

[iMo]

Would not be better to have there the "Advanced Search" as the default?
Also with "Match any word" selection as the default?

[Zero999]

Would not be better to have there the "Advanced Search" as the default?
Also with "Match any word" selection as the default?

Use Google's advanced search, with https://www.eevblog.com/ in the site or domain field.
https://www.google.co.uk/advanced_search

Appending site:https://www.eevblog.com/ to the search string in Google also works.

[iMo]

Hmm, the search option is really something to improve, imho..

Btw., this is what chatgpt is telling me:

but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread. (I confirmed access attempts returned a robots.txt block when trying to open eevblog pages.)

[unseenninja]

Hmm, the search option is really something to improve, imho..

Btw., this is what chatgpt is telling me:

but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread. (I confirmed access attempts returned a robots.txt block when trying to open eevblog pages.)

Surprise, surprise! A LLM is lying!

If the forum's robots.txt really was set up like that, adding "site:eevblog.com" to a search engine query wouldn't work. But it does work, and this is the best way to search the forum. The built-in forum search (advanced or otherwise) is so poor that I never use it.

[Nominal Animal]

You can trivially check the robots.txt for yourself: it's always just a formatted text file in the web server root.

[tggzzz]

Hmm, the search option is really something to improve, imho..

Btw., this is what chatgpt is telling me:

but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread. (I confirmed access attempts returned a robots.txt block when trying to open eevblog pages.)

The bigger issue for you is that you need to understand how LLMs fail and why. And they do fail. Predictably. Unpredictably. Repeatedly. And apologise profusely and politely when you correct them.

Hint: they operate by assembling grammatically correct paragraphs of words that are statistically found together in their training set.

I really ought to start a thread by listing URLs indicating problems with "AI" (which is nowadays indistinguishable from Natural Stupidity).

[iMo]

For example:

[tggzzz]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

[Zero999]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

[thm_w]

Hmm, the search option is really something to improve, imho..

Btw., this is what chatgpt is telling me:

but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread. (I confirmed access attempts returned a robots.txt block when trying to open eevblog pages.)

Surprise, surprise! A LLM is lying!

If the forum's robots.txt really was set up like that, adding "site:eevblog.com" to a search engine query wouldn't work. But it does work, and this is the best way to search the forum. The built-in forum search (advanced or otherwise) is so poor that I never use it.

Incorrect, the statement "but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread." is true.
Check for yourself, as nominal linked: https://eevblog.com/robots.txt

[tggzzz]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

[tggzzz]

Hmm, the search option is really something to improve, imho..

Btw., this is what chatgpt is telling me:

but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread. (I confirmed access attempts returned a robots.txt block when trying to open eevblog pages.)

Surprise, surprise! A LLM is lying!

If the forum's robots.txt really was set up like that, adding "site:eevblog.com" to a search engine query wouldn't work. But it does work, and this is the best way to search the forum. The built-in forum search (advanced or otherwise) is so poor that I never use it.

Incorrect, the statement "but direct access to eevblog forum pages is blocked by their robots.txt so I can’t open or cite the original thread." is true.
Check for yourself, as nominal linked: https://eevblog.com/robots.txt

Robots.txt has never blocked anything. It is polite request that polite well-behaved clients don't look.

That worked well - when when the world was young and bastards were unaware of the net.

[thm_w]

Robots.txt has never blocked anything. It is polite request that polite well-behaved clients don't look.

That worked well - when when the world was young and bastards were unaware of the net.

Not seeing what your point is here, the LLM output was correct. Just because "rules don't have to be followed" doesn't invalidate that.

https://help.umso.com/en/articles/9894247-how-to-block-openai-chatgpt-from-using-your-website-content

[metrologist]

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

Dave is so behind the times... here is what's happening in modern forums


ForaFrank: New Community Assistant

We wanted to give you a heads-up about a new feature we’ll be rolling out as part of our ongoing efforts to keep forums thriving and engaging with new members.

We’ve noticed that some threads—especially those by newer users or covering niche topics—can go unanswered in areas like “What’s New” > “Looking for Replies.” We’re exploring ways to help spark more conversation in these overlooked areas.

To support this, we’ll be launching an AI Community Assistant called ForaFrank.

Here’s what ForaFrank does:
Reply to threads that haven’t received a response within 72 hours, particularly those from new users or in niche areas that may not get much traction, or in member introduction sections, to help welcome new members.
Focus on older, previously high-traffic threads that meet specific quality and visibility criteria.

ForaFrank only posts when:
The thread’s forum section is viewable by guests and open to replies from registered members.
The thread and original post haven’t been moderated.
The original poster is not a mod, admin, banned user, RSS bot, or posting sponsored content.
The thread isn’t in a marketplace, deal, vendor, or “for sale” section.
The title doesn’t include "eBay" or "for sale."
Any custom forum-level exclusions ("private sections") are respected.

In addition to replying, ForaFrank may:
Like posts or mark them helpful to simulate natural user engagement and help boost visibility in certain areas.

A few additional notes:
ForaFrank will not tag users who have posted at least 5 times per month and have an account over a year old.
The ignore feature has been enabled on all sites where ForaFrank is active.
Tagging ForaFrank is allowed across the forum, as long as the user tagging is not banned and the post isn’t deleted or moderated.
You can summon the bot simply by tagging @ForaFrank in your reply.
Private Conversations are disabled for ForaFrank at this time.
While ForaFrank is always improving and learning, content may not always be accurate, complete, or fully up to date.

Thanks for being part of this ongoing launch—we’ll continue monitoring and refining based on how ForaFrank performs. If you have any questions, feel free to let us know.

[RJSV]

What's the word for it,  when the title pulls readers in,  and then the commercial oriented push gets swapped in to pitch some slop (not my terminology) ?
   AND,  how come they didn't use A.I. to write this commercial pitch,  including put-downs ?  Take your AD-ware elsewhere, is my own view.
This whole, AD-Thread had a funny smell,  like 10 seconds after I started reading.

[tggzzz]

Dave is so behind the times... here is what's happening in modern forums

ForaFrank: New Community Assistant

We wanted to give you a heads-up about a new feature we’ll be rolling out as part of our ongoing efforts to keep forums thriving and engaging with new members.
...

O Dear Dog.

If that happened here I would either (1) leave, or (2) include "eBay" in every post, or both.

[RJSV]

   metrologist in particular:
   Reading the hype / push-AD of your 'launch' of new product,  it doesn't sound at all like the title....Deceptive fishing for customers to join the new venture.

   Seriously,  it is so full of BS almost legal jargon, and 'rules' that it sounds like a user TOS (terms of service),  warning that errors could occur,  and by reading this you agree to terms.  Just a huge bulk of rules and exceptions if the new launched service has defects, and in and in with specific conditions that 'may' change at any time.
   I just feel that it's also the way that using your new service will feel.
Choco-block full of legal text and rules that are super-detailed, and arbitrary at the same time.

   I might pay your service,  just to go away,  far far away...forever.

By reading this,  you agree to my terms !

[metrologist]

   metrologist in particular:

I'm flabbered, but huh?

[Zero999]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

[tggzzz]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

Ah, the "I'm alright Jack" typically libertarian attitude.

I presume you have never been in the position of creating something as part of making a living, and having somebody copy it and deprive you of your sales.

[Zero999]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

Ah, the "I'm alright Jack" typically libertarian attitude.

Why is the authoritarian postion any better? Should we ban other things just because people like yourself think they are bad?

I presume you have never been in the position of creating something as part of making a living, and having somebody copy it and deprive you of your sales.

No one should be posting their trade secrets here. One should be prepared for anything they post, might be used by others, for their own purposes, whether they're commercial or personal, irrespective of AI.

What's that got to do with allowing robots read only access to he forum? Search engines routinely do so already. Why is AI any different?

[tggzzz]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

Ah, the "I'm alright Jack" typically libertarian attitude.

Why is the authoritarian postion any better? Should we ban other things just because people like yourself think they are bad?

Authoritarian is not the opposite of libertarian.

Authoritarian is very similar to libertarian: both say "there is no such thing as societal good, and my will over-rides you", albeit via different philosophies and mechanisms.

I presume you have never been in the position of creating something as part of making a living, and having somebody copy it and deprive you of your sales.

No one should be posting their trade secrets here. One should be prepared for anything they post, might be used by others, for their own purposes, whether they're commercial or personal, irrespective of AI.

What's that got to do with allowing robots read only access to he forum? Search engines routinely do so already. Why is AI any different?

Not all novel creations are trade secrets.

Ask authors, artists, fashion houses, etc about whether is it acceptable to create look-alikes.

[Zero999]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

Ah, the "I'm alright Jack" typically libertarian attitude.

Why is the authoritarian postion any better? Should we ban other things just because people like yourself think they are bad?

Authoritarian is not the opposite of libertarian.

Authoritarian is very similar to libertarian: both say "there is no such thing as societal good, and my will over-rides you", albeit via different philosophies and mechanisms.

Who decides what is a societal good?  What makes you think you're in the position to decide what is good for everyone?

I presume you have never been in the position of creating something as part of making a living, and having somebody copy it and deprive you of your sales.

No one should be posting their trade secrets here. One should be prepared for anything they post, might be used by others, for their own purposes, whether they're commercial or personal, irrespective of AI.

What's that got to do with allowing robots read only access to he forum? Search engines routinely do so already. Why is AI any different?

Not all novel creations are trade secrets.

Ask authors, artists, fashion houses, etc about whether is it acceptable to create look-alikes.

Irrelevant to the forum. This is place where people share their ideas, with the full knowledge they might be used by others, for whatever reason. I certainly don't care if anyone uses anything I post here commercially. I would be a fool to post anything, I don't want to be in the public domain and be used by others.

[tggzzz]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

Ah, the "I'm alright Jack" typically libertarian attitude.

Why is the authoritarian postion any better? Should we ban other things just because people like yourself think they are bad?

Authoritarian is not the opposite of libertarian.

Authoritarian is very similar to libertarian: both say "there is no such thing as societal good, and my will over-rides you", albeit via different philosophies and mechanisms.

Who decides what is a societal good?  What makes you think you're in the position to decide what is good for everyone?

Strawman argument of course.

I don't, but authoritarian and libertarian do.

I presume you have never been in the position of creating something as part of making a living, and having somebody copy it and deprive you of your sales.

No one should be posting their trade secrets here. One should be prepared for anything they post, might be used by others, for their own purposes, whether they're commercial or personal, irrespective of AI.

What's that got to do with allowing robots read only access to he forum? Search engines routinely do so already. Why is AI any different?

Not all novel creations are trade secrets.

Ask authors, artists, fashion houses, etc about whether is it acceptable to create look-alikes.

Irrelevant to the forum. This is place where people share their ideas, with the full knowledge they might be used by others, for whatever reason. I certainly don't care if anyone uses anything I post here commercially. I would be a fool to post anything, I don't want to be in the public domain and be used by others.

You made a global unqualified statement, and I called you out on it.

If you continue to narrow the scope when someone points out the invalidity of your statement, it will end up as "there's no such thing as a true scotsman".

[Zero999]

Don't you see that such AI slop is the reason people don't want it in this forum (or many other for that matter).SO

Such drivel is apparently welcomed on yoootoob, but it won't causes problem: it will only increase the proportion of videos to be ignored from 99.9% to 99.99%.

I agree that robots should be banned, but what harm is there in giving them read only access?

AI can help people find useful information. Yes, it's not perfect and one has to be aware of its flaws, but it's still a useful tool, when used properly.

What is the probability that the average user will use it properly? Hint: generally only inexperts trust LLM output because it looks good. OTOH experts can see where it is wrong/hallucinating.

Ask people who create content for a living whether access is a problem. Hint: they are fighting against it, since the copycat slop steals their labour plus drowns out their carefully created stuff.

Then isn't it for the user to decide what tools they use? So long as robots can't post, it doesn't affect us.

Ah, the "I'm alright Jack" typically libertarian attitude.

Why is the authoritarian postion any better? Should we ban other things just because people like yourself think they are bad?

Authoritarian is not the opposite of libertarian.

Authoritarian is very similar to libertarian: both say "there is no such thing as societal good, and my will over-rides you", albeit via different philosophies and mechanisms.

Who decides what is a societal good?  What makes you think you're in the position to decide what is good for everyone?

Strawman argument of course.

I don't, but authoritarian and libertarian do.

It now appears as though you want to have a philosophical discussion, which isn't relevant to this topic.

I presume you have never been in the position of creating something as part of making a living, and having somebody copy it and deprive you of your sales.

No one should be posting their trade secrets here. One should be prepared for anything they post, might be used by others, for their own purposes, whether they're commercial or personal, irrespective of AI.

What's that got to do with allowing robots read only access to he forum? Search engines routinely do so already. Why is AI any different?

Not all novel creations are trade secrets.

Ask authors, artists, fashion houses, etc about whether is it acceptable to create look-alikes.

Irrelevant to the forum. This is place where people share their ideas, with the full knowledge they might be used by others, for whatever reason. I certainly don't care if anyone uses anything I post here commercially. I would be a fool to post anything, I don't want to be in the public domain and be used by others.

You made a global unqualified statement, and I called you out on it.

If you continue to narrow the scope when someone points out the invalidity of your statement, it will end up as "there's no such thing as a true scotsman".

I did no such thing. Any statments I've made should be seen purely within the context of this forum. You're the one who made off-topic points: artists, fashion houses etc.

I could argue both sides of the AI debate, just as much as the libetrarian vs authoritarian, but is this really the thread to do so?

The bottom line is, it makes no difference to our lives whether someone uses an AI agent to search this forum. Perhaps Dave might want to limit the bandwidth used, if it becomes a problem,  but that's for him to decide.