AI Assisted

Sometimes I like to use AI to speed up the writing process. Half the time, it does. The other half, I go down a rabbit hole and come out having learned more about AI than the subject I was writing about.

Falling down the GenAI Research Rabbit Hole

Scott S NelsonLeave a comment

Before GenAI, I would have a general plan of what kind of information I would gather to prepare for a task. Sometimes that plan would be modified as new information led to a better understanding of the subject. GenAI is so much faster, more detailed, and with fewer unwanted results that I have to remind myself that this is just the beginning of the task. Otherwise, I would just stay in research mode and never get started, where before GenAI I was likely to stop just out of frustration from sifting through all the crap resulting from SEO more focused on views than value.

From “Don’t Be Evil” to Disruption

Google’s early days were defined by a clear mission: organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful. Their unofficial motto, “Don’t be evil,” reflected a user-first approach that made Google the go-to research tool for millions. The results were clean, relevant, and genuinely helpful. Searching felt empowering, and the platform’s focus was on delivering value to users.

But as Google grew, priorities shifted. The drive for revenue and shareholder returns led to an increasing emphasis on advertising and SEO optimization. Search results became cluttered with paid placements and content designed to game the algorithm, rather than serve the user. The once powerful tool for discovery became bogged down by noise, making the research process more frustrating and less productive.

The progress shift of focus from user-friendly to shareholder-value opened the door for disruption. When a company that once prided itself on “not being evil” starts to lose sight of its core values, it creates an opportunity for new technologies to step in and fill the gap.

The GenAI Parallel

GenAI today feels much like Google did in its early years: focused on utility, speed, and user value. The answers are direct, the distractions minimal, and the sense of possibility is fresh. Outside the media buzz there is real value in faster answers, deeper insights, and fewer irrelevant results. But the lesson from Google’s trajectory is clear: success can breed complacency, and the temptation to prioritize profit over usefulness is always lurking.

Just as Google’s early commitment to usefulness made it indispensable, GenAI’s current focus on delivering value is what sets it apart. The challenge will be maintaining that focus as the technology matures and commercial pressures increase.

The Shift in Research

  • Faster answers mean less time wasted on irrelevant results.
  • Deeper insights surface quickly, sometimes revealing connections I wouldn’t have spotted on my own.
  • Fewer distractions no more having to go to page 3 of results because the first two were the result of the successful SEO strategies of clickbait and content farms.

But this abundance is a double-edged sword. The temptation to keep digging, to keep asking “what else?” is strong. Without discipline, I could spend hours exploring every tangent, never moving on to actually apply what I’ve learned.

Hopes for the Future of GenAI Research

As exhilarating as this new era is, I can’t help but wonder what comes next. Will GenAI search maintain its edge, or will it eventually succumb to the same pressures that eroded Google’s utility? The cycle of innovation and decline is a familiar one in tech, and I hope that as GenAI matures, it resists the lure of ad dollars and keeps user value front and center.

  • Transparency in how results are generated will be crucial.
  • User-focused design should always outweigh short-term profits.
  • Continuous improvement based on real user needs (not just engagement metrics) must be the guiding principle.

For now, I’m enjoying the ride, even if it means occasionally reminding myself to climb out of the rabbit hole and get back to on track (which may be how Google got to where they are).

If you found this interesting, please share.

© Scott S. Nelson
Google and Microsoft battle of the AI Notebooks

Organize AI Augmentation with Notebooks

Scott S NelsonLeave a comment

I threw up a quick post about vibe writing a couple of months ago that did not go viral (similar to my other work). For that session I bounced between the free version of Perplexity.ai, Microsoft Copilot, and Google’s NotebookLM (both with a business license provided by my employer). It was very productive, with the results easily stored in NotebookLM for later reference.

Last week, I noticed a Notebook feature added to the Copilot screen and thought I would give it a whirl.

The two products have a lot in common. You can load sources to the notebooks, you can chat with the GenAI to analyze or reference the content, and they will both generate an audio summary formatted like a podcast. In that last part, NotebookLM has a maturity advantage both in how long the offering has been available and the capability to control the output.

Both provide easy access to their associated cloud storage. Again, NotebookLM shows the advantage of experience, having incorporated web search discovery for external references.

Copilot Notebook is part of the full Copilot suite of functionality, making it easier to incorporate AI work done earlier and shared functionality within your organization, where Google has its regular menu which is a lesser UX IMHO.

The AI space has a lot in common with New England weather. If you don’t like how it is right now, just wait a bit, it will change fairly soon. I’m pretty sure the Copilot Notebook UI changed just in the week from when I discovered it and today, but I can’t say for sure. Today, if I have my choice (and I do), I would go with NotebookLM for research where I don’t need any sensitive files from Microsoft Office as input, and Copilot Notebook for things where keeping the secret sauce secret is important. That is very much predicated on Office 365 being the collaborative standard in my organization, so YMMV if you don’t.

Not to leave the third participant of my original vibe writing post out, I acquired a Perplexity Pro license since that earlier post and have begun to use their Spaces functionality to have contexts similar to the Notebook offerings. It doesn’t have an audio summary option that I’m aware of, but otherwise I like how it will incorporate references from the internet with attributions for verification. It’s my personal pro account, so I don’t load any work files into it. I do find it useful writing and research. While it does not hallucinate, it is limited to the majority of what is posted online (unless I have time to prompt it along). I originally wanted to have it write the majority of this post, but the content it came back with was not entirely accurate in the areas of capabilities, so I wrote the first part the  old fashioned way.

I’m including the final draft that Perplexity came up with, as it has some good info that bears sharing, but doesn’t bear retyping to claim it as my own. Any discrepancies between what I have already written and the following, my opinions and observations are contained in the former.

Microsoft Copilot Notebooks vs Google NotebookLM

Both platforms promise to make knowledge work more efficient, but their philosophies and user experiences diverge in meaningful ways. Microsoft Copilot Notebooks leverages the deep integration and security of the Microsoft 365 ecosystem, offering a persistent, project-based workspace where AI is grounded in your organization’s documents and conversations. Google NotebookLM, by contrast, is built for flexibility and collaboration, allowing users to aggregate a wide variety of sources, query them conversationally, and generate structured outputs like summaries and study guides.

The stakes for choosing the right tool are high: the right architecture can amplify an organization’s collective intelligence, streamline workflows, and unlock new levels of productivity. Below, I explore how each platform approaches the core challenges of knowledge work—aggregation, synthesis, collaboration, and control—before distilling the comparison into focused tables for quick reference.

The Modern Knowledge Workspace: Context and Control

Microsoft Copilot Notebooks is designed for those who want a unified, persistent workspace where every piece of project context—chats, files, meeting notes, and links—lives alongside AI-powered analysis. The AI here is not a generic assistant; it is tightly constrained to the content you provide, ensuring that responses are both relevant and secure. This approach is a natural extension of Microsoft’s enterprise-first philosophy, emphasizing compliance, data privacy, and seamless integration with tools like Teams, Outlook, and SharePoint.

Google NotebookLM, meanwhile, takes a more open-ended approach. Users can upload PDFs, Google Docs, Slides, and even web content or YouTube URLs, then interact with the AI in a conversational manner. The platform excels at generating structured outputs—summaries, FAQs, timelines—grounded in the uploaded sources, with every answer backed by citations. Collaboration is a first-class feature, with advanced sharing controls and analytics available for power users.

AI as a Creative and Analytical Partner

Both platforms position AI as more than a search tool: it’s a creative and analytical partner. In Copilot Notebooks, the AI can identify themes, answer questions, and draft new content, all within the boundaries of your project’s data. NotebookLM, on the other hand, is optimized for rapid synthesis across disparate formats, making it ideal for research-heavy workflows or teams that need to generate insights from a broad array of materials.

The distinction is subtle but important: Copilot Notebooks is about depth—drilling into your organization’s knowledge base—while NotebookLM is about breadth—pulling together insights from a wide range of sources.

Licensing and Ecosystem Considerations

Choosing between these platforms is not just about features; it’s about fit. Copilot Notebooks is available only as part of a Microsoft 365 Copilot license, targeting organizations already invested in the Microsoft stack. NotebookLM offers a more accessible entry point, with free and paid tiers, and is available to most Google Workspace users. Both offer enterprise-grade privacy, but their licensing models reflect their intended audiences and integration philosophies.

Feature Comparison

Feature Microsoft Copilot Notebooks Google NotebookLM
Content Aggregation Aggregate chats, Microsoft 365 files, meeting notes, links, and more in one place. Upload PDFs, Google Docs, Slides, websites, YouTube URLs; manage all sources in a unified panel.
AI-Powered Insights Copilot analyzes notebook content to answer questions, identify themes, and draft new content grounded in your data. Conversational AI provides answers with citations, generates summaries, FAQs, timelines, and briefing docs, all grounded in your sources.
Audio Overviews Generate audio summaries with two hosts walking through key points. Audio Overviews with interactive AI hosts, listen on the go, higher limits in premium tiers.
Collaboration Currently lacks real-time sharing or collaborative editing. Advanced sharing, including “chat-only” mode and notebook analytics in Pro tier.
Integration Deep integration with Microsoft 365 apps (Teams, Outlook, Word, PowerPoint, etc.), seamless import/export. Integrates with Google Workspace; supports a wide range of file types and sources.
Customization AI responses based on notebook content; less customizable chat settings. Chat customization, adjustable response styles, and analytics in Pro tier.
Limits Governed by Microsoft 365 subscription and license tier. Free and Pro tiers: Pro offers 5x more notebooks, sources, queries, and audio overviews.

License Model Comparison

Aspect Microsoft Copilot Notebooks Google NotebookLM
Eligibility Requires Microsoft 365 Copilot license; only for business/edu accounts, not for personal/family use. Available to most Google Workspace and education accounts; Pro/Enterprise tiers for advanced features.
Pricing $30/user/month (annual subscription), as an add-on to qualifying Microsoft 365 plans. Free basic tier; Pro and Enterprise tiers offer higher limits and premium features, pricing varies by region and subscription.
Trial Availability No trial for Copilot; must have a qualifying Microsoft 365 plan. 14-day full-featured trial for up to 5,000 licenses in Enterprise.
Data Residency/Compliance Built on Microsoft 365’s compliance and security standards. Multi-region support, including EU and US, with enterprise-grade privacy controls.

Perplexity Sources:

  1. https://www.perplexity.ai/page/writing-your-first-book-with-a-BhWJ_y.MS6KRYuSp00k5ag
  2. https://originality.ai/blog/perplexity-and-burstiness-in-writing
  3. https://www.reddit.com/r/perplexity_ai/comments/1hlu5ev/what_model_on_perplexity_is_considered_the_best/
  4. https://www.geeky-gadgets.com/using-perplexity-ai-the-writing/
  5. https://broadbandbreakfast.com/elijah-clark-a-review-of-perplexity-ai-rewritten-by-perplexity-itself/
  6. https://www.allaboutai.com/ai-how-to/use-perplexity-pages-ai-to-write-articles/
  7. https://community.honeybook.com/all-about-ai-145/ai-prompt-for-copying-writing-style-2042
  8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch7UWveEKt4
  9. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3740/paper-261.pdf
  10. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3551/paper3.pdf
If you found this interesting, please share.

© Scott S. Nelson

You’ll have to pry my cup from my cold, dry hands

Scott S NelsonLeave a comment

Does Coffee Really Dehydrate You? My Quest for the Truth (With a Little Help from Perplexity.ai)

Let me set the scene: It’s Monday morning, my laptop is already making that faint whirring noise that says, “I’m trying, boss, but I might just give up any second.” I’m on my third cup of coffee, which, let’s be honest, is the only thing standing between me and a nap on my keyboard. In a moment of noble procrastination, I stumble onto this YouTube video by Dr. Seth Capehart, Navy Special Ops, ER doc, and all-around high-energy guy. The video is called “Doctor Reveals the SECRET to Sustained Energy Used by Military SPEC OPS”, and it’s packed with tips for being a high-functioning human being-something I aspire to be, at least until about 2:30 pm, when my productivity falls off a cliff.
Dr. Capehart is talking about hydration, and he drops this line:
“Most of you are dehydrated. Yes, you. Mild dehydration screws up your mood, your memory, your focus, your energy levels… so grab a water bottle and sip it throughout the day. And know coffee doesn’t count. It’s a diuretic, it actually makes you pee more. Drink actual water.”
Cue record scratch.
Wait, what? Coffee doesn’t count? As in, all these years of clutching my mug like a security blanket, I’ve just been fooling myself into a slow, shriveled, dehydrated state? I mean, I get it-water is important, and I’m not about to run a marathon on espresso alone. But is my beloved coffee really leaving me high and dry?

Enter: Perplexity.ai, My Digital Lifeline

Now, here’s where I admit something: when it comes to health science, I’m about as qualified as a goldfish with a FitBit. So, I did what any self-respecting, slightly skeptical, and caffeine-dependent tech enthusiast would do-I asked Perplexity.ai, my trusty AI assistant, for the real scoop.
And folks, the answer was… surprisingly comforting.

The Truth About Coffee and Dehydration (According to Science, Not Just Internet Comments)

Short version:
No, your morning coffee is not secretly turning you into a human raisin.
Longer version (because you know I love a tangent):
  • Yes, caffeine is a diuretic. It makes you pee a bit more, especially if you’re not used to it. But unless you’re chugging coffee like a sleep-deprived squirrel (guilty), the effect is pretty mild.
  • Coffee is mostly water. Like, 95% water. So, every cup you drink is actually helping you hydrate, not sabotage you.
  • Regular coffee drinkers build up a tolerance. If you’re a daily drinker (raises hand), your body basically says, “Oh, caffeine again? Yawn,” and doesn’t flush out extra fluids like it might for a newbie.
  • Science backs this up. Multiple studies show that moderate coffee consumption hydrates you about as well as water. It’s only if you’re drinking five-plus cups a day and not getting any other fluids that you might run into trouble. (Also, if you’re drinking that much, maybe check your pulse and your life choices.)
So, while Dr. Capehart’s advice to drink water is solid (and, frankly, your kidneys will thank you), you don’t have to banish coffee from your hydration plan. Just don’t rely on it exclusively-unless you want to risk the jitters, the 3 pm crash, and possibly writing blog posts at 2 am about hydration myths.

Practical Tips for the Caffeinated Masses

  1. Drink water, too. Yes, I know, boring. But keep a bottle handy and take a sip every time you check your email (or, in my case, every time your computer freezes).
  2. Enjoy your coffee guilt-free. It counts toward your daily fluids! Just don’t let it be your only beverage.
  3. Don’t overdo it. Five cups a day is the upper limit for most folks. More than that, and you might start vibrating at frequencies only dogs can hear.
  4. Listen to your body. If you’re thirsty, drink. If you’re tired, maybe try sleep instead of a sixth espresso. (I know, radical.)

Final Thoughts (and a Friendly Challenge)

Look, I’m not about to give up my coffee. It’s the glue holding my mornings together. But I’m also not going to ignore the wisdom of drinking plain old water-even if it doesn’t come with a frothy latte art heart.
So, next time someone tells you “coffee doesn’t count,” you can smile, sip your mug, and know that science (and Perplexity.ai) have your back.
If you’ve got your own hydration hacks, coffee confessions, or just want to commiserate about the endless quest for energy, drop a comment below. We’re all in this together-wired, tired, and occasionally hydrated.
Stay caffeinated, stay curious, and don’t forget to drink some water (your future self will thank you).
If you found this interesting, please share.

© Scott S. Nelson