But this is better than previous implementations of search, because it gives you discrete applicable answers rather than a collection of dubiously associated web links.

Except for when you ask it to determine if a thing exists by describing its properties, and then it says no such thing exists while providing a discrete response explaining in detail how there are things that have some, but not all of those properties…

… And then when you ask it specifically about a thing you already know about that has all those properties, it tells you about how it does exist and describes it in detail.

What is the point of a ‘conversational search engine’ if it cannot help you find information unless you already know about said information?!

The whole, entire point of formatting it into a conversational format is to trick people into thinking they are talking to an expert, an archivist with encyclopedaeic knowledge, who will give them accurate answers.

Yet it gatekeeps information that it does have access to but omits.

The format of providing a bunch of likely related links to a query is a format much more reminiscent of doing actual research, with no impression that you will immediately find what you want right away, that this is a tool to aide you in your research process.

This is only an improvement if you want to further unteach people how to do actual research and critical thinking.