Image: da-kuk/Getty Images.
Last week, OpenAI (the organization behind the popular ChatGPT) announced that the AI chatbot will no longer be limited to data from before September 2021 (or, in the case of GPT-4, January 2022) . In fact, it will be able to browse the web and provide information about current data. The only limit? This feature is exclusively reserved for Plus and Enterprise paying customers.
In this article, we’ll explore exactly what the new ChatGPT Plus update brings. But also and above all, what she doesn’t do.
How to enable search option with Bing
The new navigation functionality is provided by a beta option called Browse with Bing. To activate it, you must have ChatGPT Plus. Go to the menu Settingschoose Beta features and activate Browse with Bing.
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNET.
When you start a new session, you must decide whether you want to use search with Bing, Advanced Data Analysis, or plug-ins.
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNET.
You can only run one option at a time, and you must switch sessions each time you want to move to a different option.
What exactly does “Browse with Bing” do?
Both Microsoft and OpenAI don’t say much about what this feature actually does. You may remember that ChatGPT’s browsing feature was available for a short time last summer, before being disabled because it was a bit dishonest, including bypassing paywalls. Today she’s back, but OpenAI’s entire body of information about her is limited to a single paragraph.
For ChatGPT to access the web, it must do two things: search and retrieve. It must construct one or more search strings from the given prompt, then pass that search string to an internet index. This is where Bing comes in. Bing, like Google, has a representation of the entire internet in its indexes and can return search results.
Next, ChatGPT should be able to retrieve content from web pages based on their URL, extract content from advertisements, process the content in context, and provide responses to the prompter.
This all usually works in the background, through APIs and calls. I assume Browse with Bing does the same thing. But, oddly enough, that’s not how it’s depicted.
I ran a query which caused ChatGPT to search for information on ZDNet. Here’s a look at the notification screens I got during this interaction:
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNET.
What’s strange is that Browse with Bing says “Clicking on www.zdnet.com”, as if it were a mouse click. Then it says “scroll the page” as if it is actually scrolling the page. This feature is very unlikely to be implemented with a bunch of robotic screens and mice actually clicking on pages. So why indicate progress in this way? Is this an attempt to popularize or dumb down notifications for Bing’s audience?
Browsing with Bing vs WebPilot
I’ve been using ChatGPT Plus for months to access up-to-date information on the internet. At first I used the MixerBox WebSearchG plugin, but I didn’t find it very reliable. I have been using the WebPilot plugin for a few months and am very satisfied with it.
Is there more to searching with Bing than WebPilot? Absolutely not. In fact, it is more limited. Much more limited.
To demonstrate this, I will share three tests (in English). Each test compares the results of the ChatGPT Plus “Browse with Bing” feature to those of the WebPilot plugin associated with ChatGPT Plus. As it is not possible to use both in the same session, all these tests were carried out in separate sessions.
For the first two tests, I used ZDNet as my test environment. For the third, I asked ChatGPT to analyze recent news.
Find an article reference
In July, I wrote an article about Google storage in which I used the term “infraquake.” I later referenced this article in another article of mine, published in September.
My test was to see which of the two add-ons could find this information, using the question “What does Gewirtz mean by ‘infraquake’?” » Note that I did not tell ChatGPT that this was a ZDNet article, nor which Gewirtz I was referring to.
Here’s how Browse with Bing answered (the first time):
“I haven’t been able to find any information on what Gewirtz means by ‘infraquake.’ It is possible that this term is very specific, or that it has not been extensively documented online. However, I can help you gather information from other sources, or try to explain it to you based on the context in which this term was used. If you have more information or context on what led you to encounter this term, that might help me give you a more relevant answer. Is there a particular article or publication where Gewirtz mentions “infraquake”? »
As you can see, Browse with Bing had no idea what I was talking about. However, WebPilot found it quickly:
In a ZDNet article, David Gewirtz introduces the term “infraquake”. On July 10, 2023, he published an article about the problems he encountered with his enterprise Google Cloud storage subscription. In this article he uses the term “infraquake” and mentions it in the concluding paragraphs. The next day, when ChatGPT was asked how Gewirtz defined “infraquake”, he provided a clear and precise description of the attempt behind the new term “infraquake”. However, the exact definition or context behind the word “infraquake”, as Gewirtz used it in this article, was not specified in the content I accessed.
Do you want me to continue my research, or give you more information on another topic? »
Then I asked Browse with Bing again. This time he found both items.
David Gewirtz coined the term “infraquake” in a ZDNet article on July 10, 2023, when he mentioned his struggles with his Google Cloud storage enterprise subscription. The term was detailed in the concluding paragraph of the article. When Gewirtz then asked ChatGPT to define “infraquake”, a clear and precise description of the term was provided.1. »
The footnote refers to the sources used by Browse with Bing. However, although two articles are discussed in this response, only one source is given. Here we touch on another problem: one of the advantages of Browse with Bing is based on the sources cited. Yet in my testing I got a lot of information without a footnote to indicate the sources used.
Comparison of writing contexts
The next task is more complex. Let me give you some information. Sabrina Ortiz and I both write about AI for ZDNET. We both cover the topic from different angles and I wanted to see if ChatGPT could verify our respective approaches. We both have author pages, which list our articles. So I proposed to ChatGPT to answer this question:
David Gewirtz and Sabrina Ortiz both write about AI for ZDNet. Here are some recent articles from each:
https://www.zdnet.com/meet-the-team/david-gewirtz/
https://www.zdnet.com/meet-the-team/sabrina-ortiz/
Compare them and tell me in detail about the types of AI articles each of them write and how their editorial perspectives differ.
Here is the result (in English). The difference couldn’t have been more obvious. Not only does WebPilot provide a profile and some recent articles, but it also compares the types of articles we write. On the other hand, Browse with Bing does not find any content to compare.
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNET.
The failure of Browse with Bing compared to WebPilot’s excellent work is quite astounding.
News briefing
The WGA writers’ strike was resolved last week. I asked the two tools to “give me a complete briefing on the status of the screenwriters’ strike”.
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNET.
As you can see, Browse with Bing’s answer is nowhere near as comprehensive as WebPilot’s.
Finally, I wanted to see if the AI could give me the details of the final agreement. I asked him, “Describe the deal.” »
Screenshot by David Gewirtz/ZDNET.
While Browse with Bing’s answer is relevant, it is truncated. The detailed information provided by WebPilot is much more useful.
What does this all mean ?
Ultimately, Browse with Bing is disappointing. Fortunately, WebPilot does everything you could have expected of it. So if you’re looking for a good web search feature, it already exists.
The new ChatGPT feature is therefore really not interesting. It doesn’t do anything better than what already exists. It’s still in beta, so maybe it will improve. In the meantime, there’s no point using it.
Source: ZDNet.com