Show HN: ChatGPT UI for rabbit holes(delve.a9.io)
delve.a9.io
Show HN: ChatGPT UI for rabbit holes
https://delve.a9.io/
170 comments
This is very good. I can't put my finger on it, but it seems more important than a mere "gimmick." I noticed that if you click on a topic already explored, it won't open again. That's cool, I'd make it snap back to the pane where it's open.
Kudos! This is an interesting perspective on how we really need to put a little more effort into the UX of LLMs.
Kudos! This is an interesting perspective on how we really need to put a little more effort into the UX of LLMs.
It is a nice UI and invites you to investigate more...
But the problem, as far as I can tell, is that it's inviting someone to explore what's bad about LLMs (or what LLMs are bad at).
IE, LLMs are useful for doing things an individual could do but doesn't really want to. I have one friend who uses ChatGPT for boiler plate nondiscrimination policies and another who uses it for random villain descriptions and it's famous for boiler plate code.
But using LLMs for discovering new specific things (this app's seeming purpose) seems like a recipe for disaster. For example, I started looking at counterfeit bolts and ended up with the thing hallucinating an instance of "sword net" (real) that in 2018 targeted counterfeit fasteners (no refs on Google, Brave or DuckDuckBing) with the slogan "Secure the Foundation, Eliminate the Fake" (no refs similarly).
Edit: obviously, the system is confusing counterfeits generally with counterfeit fasterners (a more specialized issue, having less to do with intellectual property as such). But if drill distinctions like this are inevitable and this is what makes LLMs actually not useful for this sort of exploration.
But the problem, as far as I can tell, is that it's inviting someone to explore what's bad about LLMs (or what LLMs are bad at).
IE, LLMs are useful for doing things an individual could do but doesn't really want to. I have one friend who uses ChatGPT for boiler plate nondiscrimination policies and another who uses it for random villain descriptions and it's famous for boiler plate code.
But using LLMs for discovering new specific things (this app's seeming purpose) seems like a recipe for disaster. For example, I started looking at counterfeit bolts and ended up with the thing hallucinating an instance of "sword net" (real) that in 2018 targeted counterfeit fasteners (no refs on Google, Brave or DuckDuckBing) with the slogan "Secure the Foundation, Eliminate the Fake" (no refs similarly).
Edit: obviously, the system is confusing counterfeits generally with counterfeit fasterners (a more specialized issue, having less to do with intellectual property as such). But if drill distinctions like this are inevitable and this is what makes LLMs actually not useful for this sort of exploration.
The way I think about it is LLMs are good at DOING for you, and poor at THINKING for you.
> I can't put my finger on it, but it seems more important than a mere "gimmick."
Let me see if I can articulate it.
You know how a human conversation can have multiple threads? And ten minutes in, you find the topic has totally changed and you're trying to figure out the original topic? Sometimes you can get back to it, sometimes you can't, right?
Obviously it's not quite the same when you can see prompt history, but the conversation is still pretty linear. This pre-empts that problem by letting you fork thoughts.
Let me see if I can articulate it.
You know how a human conversation can have multiple threads? And ten minutes in, you find the topic has totally changed and you're trying to figure out the original topic? Sometimes you can get back to it, sometimes you can't, right?
Obviously it's not quite the same when you can see prompt history, but the conversation is still pretty linear. This pre-empts that problem by letting you fork thoughts.
What I really need for ChatGPT is to ask questions on a side panel and not push out the message exchange.
counterpoint: the forks dont retain any of the context that led you to them, nor does returning to an earlier branching point retain the discussion that occurred down a separate "rabbit hole". therefore it is in some ways decidedly less human that the linear approach in use
They do? When going into “weight” coming from “aerodynamics -> flight” it only talks about weight in the context of flight and plane design. I would actually like an option to “snap out” of the current topic.
So perhaps an even better interface would be a dynamically generated spider diagram?
also beautiful feature of nested comment threads, like this very orange site :)
i honestly don't get it. what's even different about it than chatGPT?
It's like following the links in wikipedia, but each link is a new chatgpt window to interact with.
Click the links.
oh -- it wasn't really obvious they were links. i think i assumed that because i'm used to the chatGPT ui.
They have the underline usually associated with hotlinks
The dotted underline is usually reserved for indicating alt text or hover content, actually. In this case, I think it's fine to be dotted, since it's not a true hyperlink, but combining that with it being the same text color is just bad from a semantic POV. It's made worse by the fact that the author apparently decided to make visited links blue. (Edit: apparently it's "active" panes, not visited, but semantically similar)
@maxkrieger if you're reading this, please consider making unvisited links blue, to conform to the universal semantics everywhere else on the web, and make visited links either purple, or black if you really want. (edit: or some different color for active panes. Green?)
@maxkrieger if you're reading this, please consider making unvisited links blue, to conform to the universal semantics everywhere else on the web, and make visited links either purple, or black if you really want. (edit: or some different color for active panes. Green?)
agreed..although, that's a more appropriate thing to critique to developing a production-ready product than a demo like this.
It's a light grey dotted line under a black bold text, it's not impossible to miss.
Funny, I was just thinking yesterday about how back in '90s, ALL links were blue with an underline (or purple if you've visited it).
Not all, but the vast majority yes, because nobody bothered styling links with CSS.
From Tim Berners-Lee webpage:
Rendition of links
Q: I'm a student of visual communications and asked myself why links are blue. I found some answers that might be, for example blue is a color of learning, but I'm not sure what is right. Is there any reason, why links are colored blue ?
A: There is no reason why one should use color, or blue, to signify links: it is just a default. I think the first WWW client (WorldWideWeb I wrote for the NeXT) used just underline to represent link, as it was a spare emphasis form which isn't used much in real documents. Blue came in as browsers went color - I don't remember which was the first to use blue. You can change the defaults in most browsers, and certainly in HTML documents, and of course with CSS style sheets. There are many examples of style sheets which use different colors.
My guess is that blue is the darkest color and so threatens the legibility least. I used green whenever I could in the early WWW design, for nature and because it is supposed to be relaxing. Robert Cailliau made the WWW icon in many colors but chose green as he had always seen W in his head as green.
One of the nicest link renditions was Dave Raggett's "Arena" browser which had a textured parchment background and embossed out the words of the link with a square apparently raised area."
https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#your
Rendition of links
Q: I'm a student of visual communications and asked myself why links are blue. I found some answers that might be, for example blue is a color of learning, but I'm not sure what is right. Is there any reason, why links are colored blue ?
A: There is no reason why one should use color, or blue, to signify links: it is just a default. I think the first WWW client (WorldWideWeb I wrote for the NeXT) used just underline to represent link, as it was a spare emphasis form which isn't used much in real documents. Blue came in as browsers went color - I don't remember which was the first to use blue. You can change the defaults in most browsers, and certainly in HTML documents, and of course with CSS style sheets. There are many examples of style sheets which use different colors.
My guess is that blue is the darkest color and so threatens the legibility least. I used green whenever I could in the early WWW design, for nature and because it is supposed to be relaxing. Robert Cailliau made the WWW icon in many colors but chose green as he had always seen W in his head as green.
One of the nicest link renditions was Dave Raggett's "Arena" browser which had a textured parchment background and embossed out the words of the link with a square apparently raised area."
https://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/FAQ.html#your
Taking a step back: The UX/UI for LLMs in general are very immature. We're in the very early days of to best interact with these tools. We need more experimentation like this to help figure out what works, and doesn't work.
Kudos!
Kudos!
Totally agree. It feels like we've barely scratched the surface.
I'm working on a project where I'm experimenting with pretty obvious things like removing the annoying markdown syntax all the LLMs show you for a split second and smoothing out how it renders the characters to match your frame rate.
https://llm-ui.com/
I'm working on a project where I'm experimenting with pretty obvious things like removing the annoying markdown syntax all the LLMs show you for a split second and smoothing out how it renders the characters to match your frame rate.
https://llm-ui.com/
> I'm working on a project where I'm experimenting with pretty obvious things like removing the annoying markdown syntax all the LLMs show you for a split second and smoothing out how it renders the characters to match your frame rate.
> https://llm-ui.com/
I have a suggestion for the page you linked. The sample on the top page that shows it doing its thing, while it is useful seeing it in action, as a result of looping the example output it was a bit difficult to read. I would suggest extending the amount of time the loop lasts to give slow readers a little more time. An extra 3-5 seconds after it finishes output would be helpful from a mobile UX viewpoint.
> https://llm-ui.com/
I have a suggestion for the page you linked. The sample on the top page that shows it doing its thing, while it is useful seeing it in action, as a result of looping the example output it was a bit difficult to read. I would suggest extending the amount of time the loop lasts to give slow readers a little more time. An extra 3-5 seconds after it finishes output would be helpful from a mobile UX viewpoint.
Thanks for the suggestion, I've increased the loop time
I will say the bare bones chat interfaces are so so much better than the awful copilot side panes, and quasi-material designed to death Google attemps at interfaces so far. I am sure with multi-modal, and with special cases for deep research there may be improvements, but insofar as straight text chat is concerned I think the simplest interfaces are hard to improve upon.
Hopefully HCI improves enough that interfaces will be a last resort.
there's a chrome extension, "HLAI" that's playing around with this idea, too
If "delve" was meant to be an in-joke, I just wanted you to know: I got it.
I also have a Custom GPT "AutoExpert (Chat)" [0] that several reviewers have called "the perfect Rabbit Hole GPT" due to the way it leads users through learning a topic. You might dig it, especially since free tier users have access to these now.
[0]: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-LQHhJCXhW-autoexpert-chat
I also have a Custom GPT "AutoExpert (Chat)" [0] that several reviewers have called "the perfect Rabbit Hole GPT" due to the way it leads users through learning a topic. You might dig it, especially since free tier users have access to these now.
[0]: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-LQHhJCXhW-autoexpert-chat
Oh I like this! Love how easy it is to dig deeper. Worth noting that free users are rather restricted in their uses of custom GPTs so probably won’t be able to dig as deeply as they’d like.
EDIT: I’ve now quizzed it about string theory, quantum mechanics, classic Roman pasta dishes, Italian wines, and sent it a picture of some poison hemlock and I think I’ve found my new favourite GPT. Great work!
EDIT 2: asked it to critique a photo I took recently and that was great too, really impressed with this.
EDIT: I’ve now quizzed it about string theory, quantum mechanics, classic Roman pasta dishes, Italian wines, and sent it a picture of some poison hemlock and I think I’ve found my new favourite GPT. Great work!
EDIT 2: asked it to critique a photo I took recently and that was great too, really impressed with this.
Thanks, I appreciate that! Rating it would be appreciated, also. :)
I like the whole approach this takes, but man I really do wonder about "learning" through something that is so eager to hallucinate. The vast majority is correct, but I know with my luck I'd unknowingly remember something that was hallucinated and some real expert would look at me funny if I mentioned it.
what's the joke?
ChatGPT overuses the word "delve" in its writing. Search your email for "delve," and look at how common it starts becoming (esp. in marketing emails) around the time ChatGPT takes off.
That's because chatGPT talks to hundreds of millions of people and puts a trillion tokens in their heads per month. And out of every 1000 tokens, a "delve" creeps up.
Ah gotcha lol
Love it! I like that the site is straight to action, but I think it could really benefit from a walkthrough. Here’s an idea!
It would be great if we had an introduction to the site right in the prompt! to help understand its main purpose right from the start.
It'll be great if the first thing you see is [Explain what "delve into" is] as a prompt suggestion. Next, it will reply with, "It’s for exploring topics deeply, similar to going down "rabbit holes" where one interesting thing leads to another. Here are some examples ..."
Then, you guide the user through the functions step-by-step. Something like, "Click on option X to start a new thread, then choose from the suggested prompts or create your own. Follow the flow to see related threads and dive even deeper."
It would be great if we had an introduction to the site right in the prompt! to help understand its main purpose right from the start.
It'll be great if the first thing you see is [Explain what "delve into" is] as a prompt suggestion. Next, it will reply with, "It’s for exploring topics deeply, similar to going down "rabbit holes" where one interesting thing leads to another. Here are some examples ..."
Then, you guide the user through the functions step-by-step. Something like, "Click on option X to start a new thread, then choose from the suggested prompts or create your own. Follow the flow to see related threads and dive even deeper."
My 2 cents here is that it’s less obvious that this would be a net positive, people fall into two camps on these type of getting started suggestions. Many will say this very guided walk through is an obvious useful feature, and many will say that it annoys them.
I’ve gathered a lot of feedback on things like this for a few different sites and apps from senior UX designers and PMs who contradict eachother on improvements and best practices all the time and from users. You’ll of course only hear from the people who want it rather then the ones who would be annoyed by it :)
Great project that seemed very easy to understand and straight forward to me, no further walk throughs needed ;)
I’ve gathered a lot of feedback on things like this for a few different sites and apps from senior UX designers and PMs who contradict eachother on improvements and best practices all the time and from users. You’ll of course only hear from the people who want it rather then the ones who would be annoyed by it :)
Great project that seemed very easy to understand and straight forward to me, no further walk throughs needed ;)
perhaps consider a tutorial you can close with just one click? those always seem a good compromise
compromise, the father of all mediocre designs
I really like this.
How about enabling user to select any piece of text and use it the way the links work now?
For instance, I've noticed it doesn't linkify peoples' names, and one thing I love on Wikipedia is that you can easily lookup people mentioned in the text. So, rather than having thousand links in the page, it would be handy if I could just select the name in the text, click some button (or right-click menu item), and get the new prompt based on the selection (user having to click a few extra times for this custom use-case wouldn't be a problem IMO)
How about enabling user to select any piece of text and use it the way the links work now?
For instance, I've noticed it doesn't linkify peoples' names, and one thing I love on Wikipedia is that you can easily lookup people mentioned in the text. So, rather than having thousand links in the page, it would be handy if I could just select the name in the text, click some button (or right-click menu item), and get the new prompt based on the selection (user having to click a few extra times for this custom use-case wouldn't be a problem IMO)
Yeah I asked it about 8-bit Atari computers and it mentioned that they had MOS 6502 CPU's but did not linkify that part, which would have been where I wanted to go down the rabbit hole next.
Great idea. I also see inspiration from Andy Matuschak's notes [0], of which I'm a bit fan
[0] https://notes.andymatuschak.org/zB74H9CuWrosEuqve7jZyCo?stac...
[0] https://notes.andymatuschak.org/zB74H9CuWrosEuqve7jZyCo?stac...
Damn, is there some SAAS like notion or an Obsidian plugin to be able to take notes like this?
No need for a plugin, it's built into Obsidian, just turn on stacked tabs
https://help.obsidian.md/User+interface/Tabs#Stack+tab+group...
https://help.obsidian.md/User+interface/Tabs#Stack+tab+group...
https://forum.obsidian.md/t/andy-matuschak-mode/70
There's an Obsidian plug-in.
There's an Obsidian plug-in.
This is great and something that I've wished existed. Thanks for making it! Right now, the tiles are linear. E.g. if tile A links to tiles B and C, clicking either B or C will open a new tile directly next to A (and only one of B or C is visible at a time). What do you think about making more of a tree layout where B and C both branch from A and can be viewed simultaneously?
I think this is a point where it’s helpful to take a step back in scope — instead of looking for LLM tree UI implementations, we should consider the mature field of general text hierarchies. I’m lazy, but I posit there are many, many UIs for visualizing wikilink-esque document repositories, such as obsidian plugins (?), browser extensions, vim/emacs/other plugins, etc.
Personally, I’m a huge fan of a few principles that I hope to impose on the world via book, eventually:
1. Indices over keys.
2. No single set should have more than N elements, where N is usually 10 but could be 2/3/4 if you’re doing decision trees, and could be 16 if you’re insane and want to use hex indices.
3. Each element can be referenced locally with a simple index (`3`), or a full path made by concatenating the indices of its ancestors from the root (`053`).
This would be an example of an “analytic” approach, as opposed to the ad-hoc “synthetic” approach of just visualizing whatever wikilink structure there happens to be. There’s a huge space of solutions “between” these two - such as constraining the ad-hoc visualization to meta-tagged wikilink relations — but I think the dichotomy is useful.
Personally, I prefer to use predesigned structures wherever possible for exactly these reasons. It makes automated visualization possible, in many cases… An example would be reusing the same 3/4 12-element directory template for every SWE project. I hope it’s clear how the same idea could be directly applied to a research project performed with lots of automated LLM queries.
Personally, I’m a huge fan of a few principles that I hope to impose on the world via book, eventually:
1. Indices over keys.
2. No single set should have more than N elements, where N is usually 10 but could be 2/3/4 if you’re doing decision trees, and could be 16 if you’re insane and want to use hex indices.
3. Each element can be referenced locally with a simple index (`3`), or a full path made by concatenating the indices of its ancestors from the root (`053`).
This would be an example of an “analytic” approach, as opposed to the ad-hoc “synthetic” approach of just visualizing whatever wikilink structure there happens to be. There’s a huge space of solutions “between” these two - such as constraining the ad-hoc visualization to meta-tagged wikilink relations — but I think the dichotomy is useful.
Personally, I prefer to use predesigned structures wherever possible for exactly these reasons. It makes automated visualization possible, in many cases… An example would be reusing the same 3/4 12-element directory template for every SWE project. I hope it’s clear how the same idea could be directly applied to a research project performed with lots of automated LLM queries.
I agree with this. The UI is already great, but a tree-like structure would be awesome.
Seconded (or thirded) -- a way to navigate tree conversations is desperately needed. Perhaps something like what Gingko [1] does.
[1] https://gingkowriter.com/
[1] https://gingkowriter.com/
Spider diagram?
I like it a lot. Feels like idle Wikipedia link surfing but with the key difference that each new step keeps track of the previous context. To me it is both novel and useful.
reminds me of the rabbit hole sessions I used to fall into in https://wiki.c2.com/ (a merge of the two interfaces (chat and context rabbit hole window thing) would be perfect for me)
For me, the snappy, easy to go from one link to another interface reminds me of hours and hours and hours spent browsing https://everything2.com in the earlier years of the Internet.
Wow, this is really neat! I usually don't comment on Show HN's because I'm rarely impressed by them and I don't want my lack of enthusiasm to be a detterent for people showing their work, but occasionally one like this comes up that is very cool. I also really appreciate that absence of tracking other than Cloudflare Insights (which seems very reasonable to me).
There's an old truism in the business, that the more "suggestions" people give about your idea, the more they like it, and it's absolutely true. Solid work!
Do you have plans to monetize and/or open source it?
There's an old truism in the business, that the more "suggestions" people give about your idea, the more they like it, and it's absolutely true. Solid work!
Do you have plans to monetize and/or open source it?
Branching conversations are great for a whole bunch of reasons. I posted a demo of a prototype:
https://x.com/ajdegol/status/1788689011302682657
And Jake Collins just announced he’s open sourcing an obsidian plugin which has a ton of features: https://x.com/JacobColling/status/1795462258258002255
And Jake Collins just announced he’s open sourcing an obsidian plugin which has a ton of features: https://x.com/JacobColling/status/1795462258258002255
I think this might be on the right track. Imagine using this to build programs as well, drag around generated functions and connect things visually. Each function can be its own node, and you can adjust the inputs and outputs by drag-dropping stuff and have the AI magically figure out the requirements.
I am working on an app [1] that does very similar as far as the branching goes (minus the right hand side visual which I have plans to support something very similar but along with a git like graph).
1: https://msty.app
1: https://msty.app
Perhaps have it not scroll down as it generates the text? Invariably I have to scroll back to the top to start reading. You could have a mini-hud (growing line, with a small rectangle at the top showing the first page of text) which would let you see at a glance how much text is being generated, without interrupting reading. Or not; ChatGPT just keeps on vibrating the phone (iOS app) during text gen, with hovering arrow in the middle-bottom as a shortcut to jump to the end.
> ChatGPT just keeps on vibrating the phone (iOS app)
I'd hate that. YouTube turned on vibration (a subtle tap) for videos whenever it reached automatically generated "key concepts" in (some) videos, with no option to disable it[1] so I had to finally disable all vibration on the phone:
Settings -> Accessibility -> Touch -> Vibration (off)
[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/1bro66c/videos_vib...
I'd hate that. YouTube turned on vibration (a subtle tap) for videos whenever it reached automatically generated "key concepts" in (some) videos, with no option to disable it[1] so I had to finally disable all vibration on the phone:
Settings -> Accessibility -> Touch -> Vibration (off)
[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/1bro66c/videos_vib...
You can turn the haptic feedback off in the app, which is what I did. It doesn’t convey useful feedback, just lain annoying.
Reminds me of Andy Matuschak's UI as well: https://notes.andymatuschak.org/z9C7piFz8mthkGUUd1W2CR?stack...
I'd love it if it had a "zoomed out" tree-like view that makes all the different paths of conversation viewable at once
That's sort of a mind map. We are building/experimenting with something like this . https://iwtlnow.microschools.in/
You can either enter your GPT key, or fill in the form here https://learn.microschools.in/ and we'll give you access if you'd like to give it a spin.
You can either enter your GPT key, or fill in the form here https://learn.microschools.in/ and we'll give you access if you'd like to give it a spin.
tldraw (make real) is close to this, but on a canvas: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38288130
This is pretty great, provides a nice set of breadcrumbs for a deep dive into any rabbit hole.
Once thing that threw me off was when I went to the original panel and clicked a second topic, it cleared out the panes that I had explored off the first topic. I had to discover they weren't really lost by re-clicking. I think it would be better if there was some visual indicator they were still there - perhaps the topic (and sub-topics) get collapsed but are still visible with the heading of the selected topic?
Once thing that threw me off was when I went to the original panel and clicked a second topic, it cleared out the panes that I had explored off the first topic. I had to discover they weren't really lost by re-clicking. I think it would be better if there was some visual indicator they were still there - perhaps the topic (and sub-topics) get collapsed but are still visible with the heading of the selected topic?
For some reason I feel like the Wikipedia should use this (or something like this) as a backend to serve a more "dialogish" UI (without replacing the current static UI). The name "delve" is spot-on, but it lacks Wikipedia's intelligence and interconnectedness.
And maybe add some locally stored "Microsoft Recall"-like feature to revisit paths you've made. It would be text-only, so use up almost no space, and be quickly searchable.
Well done it could even work in a terminal.
And maybe add some locally stored "Microsoft Recall"-like feature to revisit paths you've made. It would be text-only, so use up almost no space, and be quickly searchable.
Well done it could even work in a terminal.
I can't believe no one has mentioned Andy Matuschak's work on his notes, "Andy-mode:" https://twitter.com/andy_matuschak/status/156803277302543155...
It's a really clever use of the UI, and I think he'd be happy with it.
It's a really clever use of the UI, and I think he'd be happy with it.
Are you paying for the API calls yourself here?
I have a lot of OpenAI API credits to use by end of the month, so I’m using 4o. I’ll probably switch to a more sustainable model afterwards, consider this a request for API credits, all! Email’s on website :)
It seems like they're caching information/replies on key words which is a good optimization.
I assumed it was coming straight from the API because of the token-by-token generation effect but maybe you're right.
The token-by-token responses are probably API, while the "instant" loads seem to be cached.
Probably using groq based on speed of response
Probably using groq based on speed of response
I really love this. A book was recommended to me that I'm not going to have time to read, but this UI is an amazing way to figure out the main ideas and dive deeper into the interesting ones.
No idea if the things it's telling me are true or not, but that doesn't matter quite as much in this case.
No idea if the things it's telling me are true or not, but that doesn't matter quite as much in this case.
Which book?
How does it work?
Are hyperlinks generated as part of original prompt or you do post processing on a response with another LLM?
Are hyperlinks generated as part of original prompt or you do post processing on a response with another LLM?
You may find interesting to look at Google's AI Kitchen and the early versions of Bard (the LaMDA version) because they were specifically optimizing user scenarios where the user wants bullet points (though intuitively, your tool seems already much better than what Google did).
This UI wrapper looks fantastic! Great job on making the GPT API more accessible. Are there any plans to roll it out as a UI component that can integrate with existing systems, or does it require some backend work too? I see huge potential for clients like GPT4All and Prompta to use pluggable UI components like this, allowing people to keep their data locally.
I believe we might see AI clients evolving into open-source editors like Atom or VS Code, with plugins and packages that can be shared and iterated upon rapidly.
Also, I received the message 'You've gone too deep!' and I'm wondering what the context length limit is. Thanks!
I believe we might see AI clients evolving into open-source editors like Atom or VS Code, with plugins and packages that can be shared and iterated upon rapidly.
Also, I received the message 'You've gone too deep!' and I'm wondering what the context length limit is. Thanks!
This could replace the hours I spend on Wikipedia. Hope it's not too expensive to run.
Thanks <3
I have some API credits but I intend to make it sustainable. If any LLM provider wants to sponsor some credits, hit me up.
Otherwise I’ll switch models and add user accounts.
I have some API credits but I intend to make it sustainable. If any LLM provider wants to sponsor some credits, hit me up.
Otherwise I’ll switch models and add user accounts.
It looks like the frontend is a React SPA. What is the backend stack?
If your backend is is javascript and/or depending on how complicated it is, an easy idea might be to allow users to paste their own OpenAI API token in and have it use that. For various security/privacy reasons it would be ideal if the API calls came directly from the frontend in that case though, and given the caching implementation and other things I'm guessing decoupling that might be pretty challenging. Figured I'd throw out the idea anyway though.
If your backend is is javascript and/or depending on how complicated it is, an easy idea might be to allow users to paste their own OpenAI API token in and have it use that. For various security/privacy reasons it would be ideal if the API calls came directly from the frontend in that case though, and given the caching implementation and other things I'm guessing decoupling that might be pretty challenging. Figured I'd throw out the idea anyway though.
But not as accurate. A few quick queries and already it's providing misinformation. As much as Wikipedia has problems with truthiness in some instances, it's not nearly as bad as misinformation-ridden GPTs.
Really fun! I realized each delve carries the context of the previous ones. So I got to StarCraft II from the initial example of "Faster language models", but it mostly talked about how SC2 can be used for reinforcement learning. It'd be nice to have a key I can hold down to start a new delve on the topic (bonus points if you can stack multiple delves so you can keep going deeper on the old track as well!)
Another thing that would be interesting is if there was minimal markup for the LLM to indicate "here should be an image of [search term]" or maybe even interactive code blocks etc. But obviously this is scope creep deluxe.
Another thing that would be interesting is if there was minimal markup for the LLM to indicate "here should be an image of [search term]" or maybe even interactive code blocks etc. But obviously this is scope creep deluxe.
This is really cool! I love the rabbit hole stuff you can do when you give GPT more capabilities. I was playing around with this stuff and found I was most often wanting to use it when wanting to learn about something so made Instaclass: https://myinstaclass.com/. It finds videos, images, makes quizzes and gets more relevant web links for you to keep exploring, and structures it like a class (basically a list of bullet points like you mentioned). Try it out and lmk what you think!
I'm not sure how to use this, I just see a blank screen with the word "delve" at the top and typing doesn't do anything. I'm on Firefox on macOS.
Well this is incredible. Love the interface and the speed. My only wish is that it gave more links, right now it only seems to generate a few of them for each response.
Also it seems to be way faster than ChatGPT, yet just as intelligent, how is that possible? Can you elaborate a little bit on the architecture you're using and how it all works? What model are you using? Is it just a straight up API to ChatGPT, or are you also using additional embeddings and fine-tuning?
Also it seems to be way faster than ChatGPT, yet just as intelligent, how is that possible? Can you elaborate a little bit on the architecture you're using and how it all works? What model are you using? Is it just a straight up API to ChatGPT, or are you also using additional embeddings and fine-tuning?
I've been craving a gpt ui where I could fork conversations that stem from a genesis thought.
Put this on a canvas too so I can zoom out and look at the footprint I left to retrace my steps
Put this on a canvas too so I can zoom out and look at the footprint I left to retrace my steps
In LM Studio you can branch off of any message to start a new conversation at that point: https://github.com/onetimesecret/onetimesecret/assets/1206/f...
https://lmstudio.ai
https://lmstudio.ai
I am working on something similar [1] that you might like. It doesn't have the canvas view but that along with a git graph like UI is something that I haven't thinking of adding.
1: https://Msty.app
1: https://Msty.app
crrriispy ui dude. This is like that custom prompt people were sharing for gpt where it would preempt three relevant follow up questions.
what heuristic are you using for making words clickable?
i recommend making the links just hardcode old-school blue and purple. make it obvious you can click these things. "dive on in" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DElxVXS7PD0
what heuristic are you using for making words clickable?
i recommend making the links just hardcode old-school blue and purple. make it obvious you can click these things. "dive on in" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DElxVXS7PD0
Interesting concept, but in practice the experience is just a simplified Wikipedia hole. I enjoy all the hyperlinks in Wikipedia articles: they let me decide how deep I want to go rather than get a short summary with only a few pre-generated links.
This adds a lot more barriers to knowledge exploration (and the GPT is likely trained on Wikipedia anyways) and doesn't provide sources.
This adds a lot more barriers to knowledge exploration (and the GPT is likely trained on Wikipedia anyways) and doesn't provide sources.
awesome work! I've wanted to explore the same idea - glad to see it getting worked on. The chat interface into language models clearly works but it frequently feels like an inefficient way to explore the latent knowledge space of the model. Hypertext (the www) has also been shown to be a great way to explore a massive knowledge space. What this is doing is applying something like a hypertext layer as a way to navigate the model's latent space. Very cool. It could become something of a dynamically generated personalized wikipedia. I'm curious what the prompts look like that you are using to generate subsequent "pages". It could be as simple as "write a wikipedia style summary of <x>" but I think there is a lot of potential in including the context of my current "rabbit hole": "explain <x> in the context of <y> with a learning goal of <z>", etc. Another idea: grounding this kind of hypertext exploration with rag on a specific dataset, e.g., wikipedia or hn.
This is pretty neat.
What I really like is the tiling layout.
I subscribe to phind, which provides a nice search/answer service, which also suggests followup questions, which works fairly well: https://imgur.com/a/WfHSzdk
But if it was in a tiling format, that would be pretty awesome for the flow, especially on mobile.
I subscribe to phind, which provides a nice search/answer service, which also suggests followup questions, which works fairly well: https://imgur.com/a/WfHSzdk
But if it was in a tiling format, that would be pretty awesome for the flow, especially on mobile.
Nice work, this is really solid!
I've had something like this on my mind for a while. I really think there are some great use cases for AI around supporting/enhancing human cognition rather than trying to outsource our thinking. In this case of this, being able to rapidly "expand" your working memory with whatever is present in these cards is promising.
I look forward to seeing what you do with this.
I've had something like this on my mind for a while. I really think there are some great use cases for AI around supporting/enhancing human cognition rather than trying to outsource our thinking. In this case of this, being able to rapidly "expand" your working memory with whatever is present in these cards is promising.
I look forward to seeing what you do with this.
This is fantastic, like an encyclopedia that knows what context you are learning about as you skip pages. Nice work!
My minor recommendation is to highlight somehow that the input fields accepts any topic and the suggestions are just random try-it-out topics, it's wasn't immediately clear. Instead of 'write a message' it could say maybe, 'enter a topic to learn about'.
My minor recommendation is to highlight somehow that the input fields accepts any topic and the suggestions are just random try-it-out topics, it's wasn't immediately clear. Instead of 'write a message' it could say maybe, 'enter a topic to learn about'.
This reminds me of what Perplexity . AI 's interface was initially like, 2023Q1 (when the hyperlinks actually listed at the bottom of each reponse, instead of just as unlisted superscripts).
Nice clean interface, OC, please keep it this way. Thanks for sharing.
Nice clean interface, OC, please keep it this way. Thanks for sharing.
I used to go down rabbit holes on Wikipedia all the time--could spend hours doing this.
This to me seems like an Infinite Wikipedia! Really cool use-case!
This to me seems like an Infinite Wikipedia! Really cool use-case!
I love the left to right view. Super cool. I got stuck thought like 5 levels deep.
I really like this for source level information. Like drill down on research studies and then drill down to authors and concepts. Would be cool if it was also building a mind map or semantic tree that you could see. Like how to separate the topics by their level of generalization.
I really like this for source level information. Like drill down on research studies and then drill down to authors and concepts. Would be cool if it was also building a mind map or semantic tree that you could see. Like how to separate the topics by their level of generalization.
This is fun! It feels like infinite hyperlinks. It's the kind of wonder I had in exploring Wikipedia for the first time.
This is so cool! I can see myself using this all the time for research work. Would love to manage multiple sessions. Would also like to see if the individual tiles could be resized. I would like to decrease the size of slightly less important tiles perhaps. Also, how are you managing the API costs right now?
Great work!
Great work!
Follow up questions generated with the answer is easy picking. Much like Google (traditional search) does. To spice it up, there can be a slider using which - questions would change. The axis of slider itself can be an interesting one eg: simple to advanced. It will depend on the topic being discussed.
This is cool, it's almost like a wiki you can talk to. I also wanted to make a thread-based UI for LLM chat since I realized that's how I typically interact with them (almost like git branches) but hadn't gotten around to it yet. Neat to see others are interested in branching conversations as well!
https://delve.a9.io/ no longer give answer.
Please give me code/self-host frontend, or let me input my api key
Very cool!
It seems to dead-end unexpectedly on some topics. For example, I delved "path tracing" -> "importance sampling" and it output a section on probability distribution functions (PDFs) but didn't offer any links to explore those further.
Highlight-to-delve would probably fix that.
It seems to dead-end unexpectedly on some topics. For example, I delved "path tracing" -> "importance sampling" and it output a section on probability distribution functions (PDFs) but didn't offer any links to explore those further.
Highlight-to-delve would probably fix that.
It would be great to implement a browser extension that lets you highlight a term or phrase on any webpage and open a GPT rabbit hole for that term or phrase.
@maxkreiger - if I were to build one as a proof of concept, would you object to me having it hyperlink to your UI?
@maxkreiger - if I were to build one as a proof of concept, would you object to me having it hyperlink to your UI?
Since the page did not provide any information on the language model used, I asked it and it said it was Anthropic. An About page would go a long way for this project.
I see there are many comments about Wikipedia. I can't find the link, but many years ago (like 7+), there was a concept Wikipedia redesign that proposed the same UX. This was a "marketing" project of a non-Wikipedia related designer. Does anybody remember?
I think I remember this article but I don't have it to hand. I found it when I was developing my hoverflow.io browser wiki extension.
This is great, I love it.
I'd love to have it be keyboard only. Maybe using a command syntax like "/link title", so it knows we don't want to continue the chat in the same panel, but want to follow the keywords.
You've got something great here!
Reminds me of the Smalltalk IDE and browser.
Also, WorldSim could use something like this, and perhaps web browsers.
Anyway, I suspect this resonates for anyone that has to do research on the web or in GPT. I often end up with multiple threads on GPT anyway trying to learn about something.
Also, WorldSim could use something like this, and perhaps web browsers.
Anyway, I suspect this resonates for anyone that has to do research on the web or in GPT. I often end up with multiple threads on GPT anyway trying to learn about something.
I love how it feels like obsidian
This reminds me of Andy Matuschak's notes website [0]. I dig this view for much better understanding.
[0]: https://notes.andymatuschak.org/
[0]: https://notes.andymatuschak.org/
I dig this. Reminds me of column mode in MacOS's finder, which is similarly helpful in "rewinding" an exploration of a file system.
Would be interesting to rabbit other rabbit hole resources like Wikipedia or IMDB in this way too.
Would be interesting to rabbit other rabbit hole resources like Wikipedia or IMDB in this way too.
> column mode in MacOS's finder
FWIW these are known as "Miller columns" if anyone wants to research the topic further: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_columns
FWIW these are known as "Miller columns" if anyone wants to research the topic further: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_columns
Neat! I made a free browser extension with a somewhat similar behaviour (https://hoverflow.io) Inspired by nested tooltips in Crusader Kings 3.
For coding it would be nice to add task to links. So when a link is clicked you could simply choose to follow it or create a new agent with the link. Each agent will tune the output as one goes down the rabbit hole.
I like it! Would like to have some sort of map/visualization of what topics i've explored for when diving into parallel sessions. Right now the UI only supports diving into one branch at the time.
There should be something a UI like this but it just sources data from Wikipedia. Could just be the Abstract and allow you to open a wikipedia iframe or something. You should add this as a mode to this app
I actually made a free browser extension around this idea (hoverflow.io) after playing the new Crusader Kings.
UI is very clean. Left right scroll is awkward without a trackpad, however
First impression, a fast and neat interface. I went into data indexing rabbit hole as that has been my obsession these days.
Cudos! Particularly impressed with the lack of clutter and the speed.
Cudos! Particularly impressed with the lack of clutter and the speed.
I REALLY like how snappy it is. I've always been impressed with how fast Wikipedia managed to stay over the years, but this is even better. Really nice work.
This is what hyperlinking should have always been...context-sensitive. Very useful. You have earned a coveted slot on my bookmark list. Thank you!
Super cool!
What’s the logic used to determine what words are links? I found that it was possible to feed it new vocabulary and that it would turn those into links
What’s the logic used to determine what words are links? I found that it was possible to feed it new vocabulary and that it would turn those into links
I really, really love this. Even after using it for just a few minutes, I'm sold. Excellent work, will it be open source at some point?
One critique is that I wish there was a feature to manually make a word highlighted. It's pretty good at figuring out where to branch, but for really lexically dense topics, it would be nice to specify it without needing to type in the chat. Perhaps a "hover for definition" feature would suffice, similar to Wikipedia.
Seconding this, I'd love to add an interface like this to a RAG setup.
I just get a lightblue screen (Firefox Windows 11)
Might be nice to display a couple of related articles from eg. Wikipedia or Wiktionary if the user wants to cross-reference.
This is absolutely brilliant. Like Tetris for the Gameboy.
I have no suggestions how to monetise this but its brilliant.
This is an outstanding idea, I love it!
It would be great if you could support Ollama (or an OpenAI compatible endpoint) for private LLMs.
It would be great if you could support Ollama (or an OpenAI compatible endpoint) for private LLMs.
I love this! My suggestion is to not close panels when going back up levels but instead put them in a parallel branch.
It seems that commonly used terms are cached, pretty neat strategy since this is wikipedia-like information website.
Which LLM is this using because it is providing hallucinated facts that differ from ChatGPT 4o on the latest model?
This UI is fantastic! Was the name "delve" AI generated? I just cannot believe a human uses that word...
It's obviously a reference to the meme going around about how ChatGPT uses that word inordinately frequently.
time for you to delve into more literature.
some feedback:
* can you make it so we can share links of sessions?
* can you describe on the homepage or in a link from the homepage what it does.
* can you make it so we can share links of sessions?
* can you describe on the homepage or in a link from the homepage what it does.
Yes, +1 to sharing links! I'll also add:
* Enable the use of personal OpenAI API keys.
* Include system prompts, such as "If the topic is about X, highlight new topics by Y" and "Reply to all as if explaining the topic to a 6-year-old."
* Backlink to the original thread when the same topics are found.
* It would be great if this could be a desktop app with all answers saved locally, creating "my own personal" infinite wiki.
* Enable the use of personal OpenAI API keys.
* Include system prompts, such as "If the topic is about X, highlight new topics by Y" and "Reply to all as if explaining the topic to a 6-year-old."
* Backlink to the original thread when the same topics are found.
* It would be great if this could be a desktop app with all answers saved locally, creating "my own personal" infinite wiki.
I love the experience. It's almost like a mind map that keeps getting better and better.
great work! We are also trying to design a new different way to use LLM: https://flowith.io you can generate stuff on an infinite canvas.
Very nice idea, hope it's not costing you a fortune to run!
Maybe let us put in our own api keys?
Maybe let us put in our own api keys?
Warning: if you plug this into tvtropes then global productivity will drop sharply.
How to combine the learning efficiency of this with the structure of a textbook?
Really curious about the data structure you're using behind the scenes.
Can you please explain how you extract (or get it to generate) the links?
Love this. It would really benefit from a back/forward button though!
This made me chuckle with delight once I understood what it was doing.
What model/api are you using for this ?
Pretty cool, love it, why not opening a new tab instead?
It's important to remember that Wikipedia is
Dark mode please!
i wish perplexity.ai did this
rip your api credits
this UI feels right.
nice job!
[deleted]
Source code?
This is an interface that reifies that rabbit-holing process into a tiling layout. The model is instructed to output hyperlink-prompts when it mentions something you might want to delve into.
Lots of features to add (sessions, sharing, navigation, highlight-to-delve, images, ...). Would love to hear other usecases and ideas!