151–160 of 1000 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you consider Google to be mid-journey?
Sure, I think that's a fair characterization. They have AI-accelerated hardware in client and server-side devices now, as well as a decent catalog of AI-powered demos and features. They're not exactly a leading force in the AI world, but they're dedicated to making the pilgrimage all the same.
> Soon, you’ll see AI-powered features in Search Despite this blog obviously being written for Wall St, this line is key. This is why anyone is going to struggle to compete with Google in AI. Google Search is used so widely and its taxonomy of meaning so vast already that once they flip this on they’ll be unstoppable. (Assuming any rate of improvement whatsoever as we search.) I’m not mentioning all other learning da…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Got you: https://labs.kagi.com/ai/sum?url=https://blog.google/technol... Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google and Alphabet, has announced the release of Bard, an experimental conversational AI service powered by Google's Language Model for Dialogue Applications (LaMDA). Bard seeks to combine the breadth of the world's knowledge with the power, intelligence and creativity of Google's large language models. It draws on informa…
Wow, thank you for that link. Now I have a new bookmarklet... javascript:location.href=' https://labs.kagi.com/ai/sum?url='+encodeURIComponent(locati...
Note I've been using Kagi happily for several months and it has successfully replaced Google Search for me. Highly recommended.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I certainly didn't kill Microsoft, but it's tens of billions of dollars they didn't get. It's significant, even at Microsoft's scale.
There is also opportunity cost though. Maybe if they succeeded in mobile then they would have missed Teams. Its hard to say that the side effects from missing that wave were exclusively negative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is a reactionary move, but Bard existed for months on the intranet, but not as a public offering. So they have the technology but not the product.
Presumably this was the infamous tech that got that one worker fired because he thought it was sentient and wanted to blow the whistle on unethical AI treatment right? This story: https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/23/business/google-ai-engineer-f... It would be funny if Google hastily rehires him as a marketing evangelist to show people their AI is so good you think it's alive.
Wouldn't it look exactly like this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I certainly didn't kill Microsoft, but it's tens of billions of dollars they didn't get. It's significant, even at Microsoft's scale.
There is also opportunity cost though. Maybe if they succeeded in mobile then they would have missed Teams. Its hard to say that the side effects from missing that wave were exclusively negative.
> And today, we’re [...] opening it up to trusted testers ahead of making it more widely available to the public in the coming weeks. It feels like a mistake to make the big announcement for this, but not open it up to a wide audience. It's not like ChatGPT hasn't been out for months now. Not sure how much they gain by making headlines before it's ready for people to play with it.
Lotus 123, Borland and Wordperfect were at the top of the software world. They failed to make the transition to GUIs/Windows. Microsoft missed the arrival of the web. Microsoft also missed the mobile revolution and ended up with zero mobile operating system market share. Internet Explorer, having vanquished Netscape, declared "job done" and stopped developing the web browser further, only to be cast to irrelevance fo…
The blog post is an example of why when you go through a number of edits and additions from various internal groups, marketing, legal, compliance etc. you end up with a message that's a lot of words but not a lot of information for any key audience. I went through the article 3 times thinking I missed the link to try out Bard, get some sense of timeline, roll-out plan...nothing. Come on Google...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like a very reactionary move. ChatGPT went viral, and now they have to rush something to market to try and compete. So of course the product doesn't exist yet, but they've had enough time to put together a project plan and some mockups. It's not a great position to be in.
Google was in this position in relation to Apple and the iPhone, and that worked out all right for them. First-mover advantage isn't the be-all, end-all.
With ChatGPT the threat is different and both are going after expanding usage.