I haven't tried this but in principle I think this sort of finding a needle in a haystack situation (finding the correct path to assistance in a government service) is one of the rare circumstances where a well-crafted chatbot can be genuinely useful rather than just irritating.
1. decent search, if you mean something other than what the browser provides, isn't part of a static document
2. the nature of the problem statement "needle in a haystack" suggests obstacles to traditional text search, eg. too many false positives to be helpful for natural searches and challenges to constructing more specific ones.
language models introduce new possible solutions to this ie semantic search. poorly-designed chatbots could be worse than a basic search, sure
1. I mean static documents plus decent search you can find the right documents.
2. Yes, but its difficult to get a chat bot to function well over the wide range of services a government offers and the wide range of users who need government services.
One of the most annoying chatbots I have ever come across was on a UK government site. The DVLA. "lets tell you what you already know and not answer the question".
Possibly something well designed might make it easier, but I have found most of gov.uk to be very usable and helpful.
How does the form factor of a chat bot affect the quality of a search running on a backend? It has the benefit of obviously having a semantic search affordance which a standard search field doesn't.
A decent search and good organization can help a more technical person find what they are looking for, but may not work well for someone with far less experience in such matters. Look at how well google returns (or at least use to) results for someone with google-fu verses someone who queried in the same fashion they would've asked a teacher or such.
A chat bot, in theory, can help enable someone who isn't as familiar with searching, doesn't know the relevant terms, or lacks a sufficient literacy level to efficiently use an otherwise well organized site. The catch is that a poorly performing chat bot can just as easily mislead such a person.
Having used various "ask AI" features in various work tools over the last half a year for looking up project designs, documentation, chat logs, meeting notes etc., I can tell you even a half assed AI chatbot is a huge improvement over the pre-AI state of things for this use case.
I've tried it - I've been playing around with a vibe coded application that crawls municipal websites, indexes and embeds, and then does rag retrieval. It came from the need to dig up specific information that's scattered across PDFs, multiple web pages, etc. - exactly as you described. AI does a decent job (w/ RAG) of synthesizing.
- Loud party or people-related noise: call the Winnipeg Police Service non-emergency line at 204-986-6222.
- Animals making unreasonably loud, unnecessary or excessive noises: report it through 3-1-1.
- Mechanical equipment noise like furnaces or air conditioners, or noise from construction tools used by a company or resident: contact Community By-law Enforcement Services at 3-1-1.
- Planned event noise: you may need a Noise Permit at no cost, but it is not for construction work and should be submitted at least four weeks before the event.
The City also says noise-generating activities within 150 metres of a residential property are generally prohibited before 7 a.m. and after 9 p.m. on weekdays, and before 9 a.m. and after 9 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays and statutory holidays.
------
YMMV. A big part of the backend is categorizing hits and misses, with an eye to helping municipalities clean up conflicting information, fill obvious gaps, etc.
This works fine when you're sicking enforcement on someone and don't really care, the bigger the blast radius the better, you just want to know who to call.
Where it falls apart is "how do I" type questions because usually the legally factual answer is some huge complex state diagram where three local and four state agencies theoretically have discretionary jurisdiction over a your petty af project or business but the in practice answer is that some agency rubber stamps them all with minimal fuss. You can't make the legally factual answer clear because the degree to which people support the status quo is largely predicated on ignorance, but you also can't come out and say in writing that you have a policy of rubber stamping boring stuff.
Basically the same reasons that all but the most minor and narrowly targeted attempts at permitting reform fail.
The thought is nice but in reality you're basically asking the government to give up power and it takes obscene amounts of political capital to force that to happen in most cases.
I forgot about this problem, this is so true, but I will say that maybe surfacing these contradictions is the first step in fixing them.
Especially at the local level, we have a huge problem with opaque bureaucracy whose only function is to privilege incumbents (such as developers with connections) and make life difficult for anyone doing something unusual (even if it technically complies with all legal requirements).
This is where people usually point out POSIWID[0], but ideally government agencies should stick to what it says on the law/regulation, not have some hidden purpose.
Honestly if your city has a 311 style thing, I'm not sure there's a ton of need for an LLM. Eight or nine years ago my grandmother visited me in New York and accidentally left her pocket book in the cab. Since I had paid for it with my credit card, I was able to see the medallion number in the transaction, so I called 311 and said that I wanted to get in touch with a specific taxi. It prompted me for the medallion number, which I told it, and then it transferred me to a call with the dispatch service, who then transferred me to the specific garage, and they called the driver and told him to call me, so we were able to meet up again and get the pocketbook back (turned out he returned to where he had dropped us off to try to find us, but since we only had a short stop there, we took another cab back to her hotel after, so we were gone).
I'm trying to do something similar but more general, pulling in city pdfs but also meeting transcripts, budget data, municipal codes and permit data, and providing all this through an mcp. I've used it a number of times for personal interactions with my local government, it's been very helpful.
I'd be interested in connecting and sharing ideas/feedback/learnings if you are.
hey, really like your idea and have been brainstorming the same kind of tool! not as far along as you or the OP but I would love to hear about what your roadmap/plan is for a tool like this. all about helping the ppl. should i try the email on your site?
Another way to do it is exemplified here: <a href="https://www.gov.uk" rel="nofollow">https://www.gov.uk
A well thumbed discussion on how to discover information though menus and otherwise is here: <a href="https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/FAQ/WAISandGopher.html" rel="nofollow">https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/FAQ/WAISandGopher.html
You will notice that GOV.UK has effectively decided to use all three models - GOPHER/WAIS/W3. I find that it is surprisingly quick to find stuff on GOV.UK.
mellosouls · · focus · HN ↗
scun · · focus · HN ↗
nfw2 · · focus · HN ↗
graemep · · focus · HN ↗
nfw2 · · focus · HN ↗
2. the nature of the problem statement "needle in a haystack" suggests obstacles to traditional text search, eg. too many false positives to be helpful for natural searches and challenges to constructing more specific ones.
language models introduce new possible solutions to this ie semantic search. poorly-designed chatbots could be worse than a basic search, sure
graemep · · focus · HN ↗
2. Yes, but its difficult to get a chat bot to function well over the wide range of services a government offers and the wide range of users who need government services.
One of the most annoying chatbots I have ever come across was on a UK government site. The DVLA. "lets tell you what you already know and not answer the question".
Possibly something well designed might make it easier, but I have found most of gov.uk to be very usable and helpful.
nfw2 · · focus · HN ↗
sejje · · focus · HN ↗
I'm very pro-ai, but we can improve the UI a lot sometimes, from the chat bot paradigm.
SkyBelow · · focus · HN ↗
A chat bot, in theory, can help enable someone who isn't as familiar with searching, doesn't know the relevant terms, or lacks a sufficient literacy level to efficiently use an otherwise well organized site. The catch is that a poorly performing chat bot can just as easily mislead such a person.
Xirdus · · focus · HN ↗
dreadsword · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://opencity.services/chat/winnipeg" rel="nofollow">https://opencity.services/chat/winnipeg
how do i report a noise complaint?
It depends on the type of noise:
- Loud party or people-related noise: call the Winnipeg Police Service non-emergency line at 204-986-6222.
- Animals making unreasonably loud, unnecessary or excessive noises: report it through 3-1-1.
- Mechanical equipment noise like furnaces or air conditioners, or noise from construction tools used by a company or resident: contact Community By-law Enforcement Services at 3-1-1.
- Planned event noise: you may need a Noise Permit at no cost, but it is not for construction work and should be submitted at least four weeks before the event.
The City also says noise-generating activities within 150 metres of a residential property are generally prohibited before 7 a.m. and after 9 p.m. on weekdays, and before 9 a.m. and after 9 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays and statutory holidays.
------
YMMV. A big part of the backend is categorizing hits and misses, with an eye to helping municipalities clean up conflicting information, fill obvious gaps, etc.
cucumber3732842 · · focus · HN ↗
Where it falls apart is "how do I" type questions because usually the legally factual answer is some huge complex state diagram where three local and four state agencies theoretically have discretionary jurisdiction over a your petty af project or business but the in practice answer is that some agency rubber stamps them all with minimal fuss. You can't make the legally factual answer clear because the degree to which people support the status quo is largely predicated on ignorance, but you also can't come out and say in writing that you have a policy of rubber stamping boring stuff.
Basically the same reasons that all but the most minor and narrowly targeted attempts at permitting reform fail.
The thought is nice but in reality you're basically asking the government to give up power and it takes obscene amounts of political capital to force that to happen in most cases.
iamnothere · · focus · HN ↗
Especially at the local level, we have a huge problem with opaque bureaucracy whose only function is to privilege incumbents (such as developers with connections) and make life difficult for anyone doing something unusual (even if it technically complies with all legal requirements).
This is where people usually point out POSIWID[0], but ideally government agencies should stick to what it says on the law/regulation, not have some hidden purpose.
[0]: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...
saghm · · focus · HN ↗
janj · · focus · HN ↗
I'd be interested in connecting and sharing ideas/feedback/learnings if you are.
<a href="https://civicmined.org" rel="nofollow">https://civicmined.org
botanrice · · focus · HN ↗
gerdesj · · focus · HN ↗
A well thumbed discussion on how to discover information though menus and otherwise is here: <a href="https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/FAQ/WAISandGopher.html" rel="nofollow">https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/FAQ/WAISandGopher.html
You will notice that GOV.UK has effectively decided to use all three models - GOPHER/WAIS/W3. I find that it is surprisingly quick to find stuff on GOV.UK.
qgin · · focus · HN ↗
The web would be a better place if everything were more GOPHER-like.
i_love_retros · · focus · HN ↗