I barely use Bard, but I do use the Search Generative Experience and the Bard-in-Google Docs quite a lot. I find both quite useful as they integrate quite well into my daily workflow.
Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
81–90 of 218 posts
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#82Bard was just produced so Google could tell shareholders that they attempted to enter the "AI" space and "compete" with GPT (as if this was somehow a worthy goal, and worth the time of engineers). Given that goal, it succeeded: they can now tell shareholders they tried and people used it, but now the market is slowly moving to abandon chatty AI type LLM things.
Really? Every company I do business with has replaced its customer service with a chat bot.
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#83Google's AI experience is going to be about the same as their social experiments which is they'll fail. I didn't think this before but now realising ChatGPT and other personal assistants (because that's what they are) will really succeed not just because of performance but network effects and social mindshare. You'll use the most popular AI assistant because that's what everyone else is using. Maybe some of these thi…
> will really succeed not just because of performance but network effects and social mindshare
The network effect is only relevant if some sort of native interoperability is required. Which, being the nature of LLMs I don't think is a significant requirement as translation is the core of the function.
Thanks to market forces and the nature of competition the "most popular" will shift over time as different use cases for LLMs are applied. All it takes is one big misstep by Apple, Microsoft, Google or even OpenAI and a large market share can move overnight.
I'm excited about onboard mobile LLMs in a few years and their capabilities.
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#84Look at Gemini, it’s their new model, currently in closed beta. Hearsay says that it’s multimodal (can describe images), GPT-4 like param count, and apparently has search built in so no model knowledge cutoff. Basically they realized Bard couldn’t cut it and merged DeepMind into Google Brain, and got the combined team to work on a better LLM using the stuff OpenAI has figured out since Bard was designed. Takes months…
> Look at Gemini, it’s their new model, currently in closed beta.
With all the talent, data, and infrastructure that Google has, I believe them. That said, it is almost comical they'd not unleash what they keep saying is the better model. I am sure they have safety reasons and world security concerns given their gargantuan scale, but nothing they couldn't solve, surely? They make more in a week than what OpenAI probably makes in a year! They seem to be sleep walking compared to the sprinting pace of development around them. You don't say that often about Google.
I wonder what makes the Chrome and Android orgs different? Those openly conduct ridiculous experiments all the time.
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#85[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#86Bard is actually pretty good when it responds from my experience. I definitely prefer the way it outputs results much more compared to chatgpt and it does provide sources / a UI linking to relevant material quite often. It is also searching the web for the latest info which is definitely felt in it's output. However, it often says "I can't help with that" even for relatively simple queries which makes it a little ann…
This is exactly my experience.
The answers themselves aren't too different from ChatGPT 3.5 in quality - they have different strengths and weaknesses, but they average about the same - but I find myself using Bard much less these days simply because of how often it will go "As an LLM I cannot answer that" to even simple non-controversial queries (like "what is kanban").
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#87Bard’s biggest problem is it hallucinates too much. Point it to a YouTube video and ask to summarize? Rather then saying I can’t do that it will mostly make up stuff, same for websites.
Wake me up when AI based search is actually useful. Then I'll be interested.
I use Kagi's FastGPT (which is really Anthropic Claude I think) for queries I have only a fuzzy idea of how I should put it into words.
It's not very verbose and gives you a search summary, consisting of something like four paragraphs, each with a citation at the end.
As others have stated, asking it yes/no questions is not really a use case though.
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#88Never used it. I expect Google will cancel it anyway.
i'm in the same boat somewhat. I used it a few times at launch and shelved it quickly just simply because I didn't feel like spending time to work toward becoming an expert in a product that's probably soon to be dead.
that anxiety towards google should probably be formally named by this point; i've talked to so many that express essentially the same feeling.
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#89Bard was just produced so Google could tell shareholders that they attempted to enter the "AI" space and "compete" with GPT (as if this was somehow a worthy goal, and worth the time of engineers). Given that goal, it succeeded: they can now tell shareholders they tried and people used it, but now the market is slowly moving to abandon chatty AI type LLM things.
the market is slowly moving to abandon chatty AI type LLM things I didn't know this was happening. Do you know where the market is moving to?
AI generated monetized content via midjourney, text to gif and text to video.
Re: Ask HN: 6 months later. How is Bard doing?
#90Bard’s biggest problem is it hallucinates too much. Point it to a YouTube video and ask to summarize? Rather then saying I can’t do that it will mostly make up stuff, same for websites.
I had a similar issue so I made https://TLDWai.com to summarize YouTube videos
I could use this for my project but most of my videos don't have any dialogue or voice overs. It would be perfect if it described the actual (visual) video content.