On top of that, he claims that Pearl is significantly less likely to provide misinformation than many other AI search engines—which he believes are likely to deal with “a tidal wave” of lawsuits based on bad answers they give. “Those other players are building amazing technologies. I call them Ferraris or Lamborghinis,” Kurtzig says. “We’re building a Volvo—safety first.”
This pitch about Pearl’s superiority, of course, made me even more keen to try it. Kurtzig seemed so certain that Pearl would still enjoy Section 230 protections. I asked the AI if it agreed.
Pearl said it likely qualifies as an “interactive computer service” under Section 230, which would mean that it’d be shielded from being treated as a publisher, just as Kurtzig suspected. But, the AI went on, “Pearl’s situation is unique because it generates content using AI.” It didn’t have a definitive answer for me after all.
When I asked to speak to a lawyer directly, it rerouted me to JustAnswer, where it asked me to provide the answer I wanted verified. I said I needed to go back and copy the answer, as it was several paragraphs long, but when I navigated back to the Pearl website, the conversation was gone and it had reset to a fresh chat.
When I tried again, this time opening the Pearl browser on desktop, I received a similarly uncertain answer. I decided to trigger a human-fact check; after several minutes, I received the TrustScore™—a measly 3!
Pearl recommended that I seek out an actual expert opinion, porting me to its subscription page. I’d been given a log-in so I didn’t have to pay while I tested the tool. It then connected me with one of its “legal eagle” experts.
Unfortunately, the lawyer’s answers were not clearer than the AI. He noted that there was ongoing legal debate about how Section 230 will apply to AI search engines and other AI tools, but when I asked him to provide specific arguments, he gave a strange answer noting that “most use shell companies or associations to file.”
When I asked for an example of one such shell company—quite confused about what that has to do with a public debate about Section 230—the “legal eagle” asked if I wanted him to put together a package. Even more confused, I said yes. I got a pop-up window indicating that my expert wanted to charge me an additional $165 to dig up the information.
I declined, frustrated.
I then asked Pearl about the history of WIRED. The AI response was serviceable, although basically the same stuff you’ll find on Wikipedia. When I asked for its TrustScore™ I was once again confronted with a 3, suggesting it was not a very good answer. I selected the option to connect with another human expert. This time around, possibly because it was a question about the media and not a straightforward legal or medical topic, it took a while for the expert to appear—well over 20 minutes. When he did, the expert (it was never established what gave him his media bona fides, although his profile indicated he’d been working with JustAnswer since 2010) gave me a remarkably similar answer to the AI. Since I was doing a free test, it didn’t matter, but I would’ve been annoyed if I had actually paid the subscription fee just to get the same mediocre answer from both a human and an AI.
For my last stab at using the service, I went for a straightforward question: how to refinish kitchen floors. This time, things went much more smoothly. The AI returned an adequate answer, akin to a transcript of a very basic YouTube tutorial. When I asked the human expert to assign a TrustScore™, they gave it a 5. It seemed accurate enough, for sure. But—as someone who really does want to DIY refinish my kitchen’s old pine planks—I think when I actually go looking for guidance, I’ll rely on other online communities of human voices, ones that don’t charge $28 a month: YouTube and Reddit.
If you end up testing Pearl, or any other newfangled AI search products, and you have a memorable experience, please do let me know how it went in the comments below the article. You can also reach me by email at [email protected]. Thanks for reading, and stay warm!
