AI Test Kitchen already showed it's way behind
Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
121–130 of 234 posts
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Clippy, write me a 25 page requirements doc for an integration between Workday and our IAM solution."
Thanks to that joke I just imagined how it could be a game changer for internal corporate documents (the kind that are 50+ pages and never read), especially if it’s native into Office.
We'll have to invent a new form of busy work to justify head count.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#123I think there is a genuine concern that Google could overreact and launch a half-baked product in pure panic of being left behind or one upped by Microsoft. There is also a fear, I think, that the ChatGPT integration with Bing/Edge could not go all that smoothly. I think it could be game changing in many ways, but I can also see both of these falling apart. Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri were thought to be g…
> Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri
These were always bullshit, other than maybe for turning your lights on, setting alarms, & checking the weather.
On the other hand, I immediately found ChatGPT / Copilot useful as a professional tool I could use to make my job measurably easier.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#124Someone responded that Google is terrified of being left being Microsoft. I think that's hilarious because it highlights the thing google should actually be terrified of - the fact that it has lost the capacity to innovate (same applies to MS, FB, etc).
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clippy?
Microsoft really missed out by not having the bing AI assistant be clippy-based
I guarantee they focus-tested it and found that most people who remember Clippy don't have fond memories of him (and/or remember the memes/jokes about him more than they remember the actual Clippy), but, more importantly, most people don't remember him at all and wondered why this weird paper clip guy was talking. he hasn't been in an Office product since, what, 23 years ago or something? (not counting cameos)
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks to that joke I just imagined how it could be a game changer for internal corporate documents (the kind that are 50+ pages and never read), especially if it’s native into Office.
We'll have to invent a new form of busy work to justify head count.
Actually reading printed copies of those documents would be the penultimate busy works, so much that it would quickly become uberablingly alienating!
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks to that joke I just imagined how it could be a game changer for internal corporate documents (the kind that are 50+ pages and never read), especially if it’s native into Office.
We'll have to invent a new form of busy work to justify head count.
Employee: Chatbot, write me a 20 page document describing what I've been working on the past two weeks so that I can give it to my manager.
Manager: Chatbot, write me 1 page summaries of these documents from my employees so that I can collate them for the CEO.
CEO: Chatbot, where should I go on vacation next?
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#128I think there is a genuine concern that Google could overreact and launch a half-baked product in pure panic of being left behind or one upped by Microsoft. There is also a fear, I think, that the ChatGPT integration with Bing/Edge could not go all that smoothly. I think it could be game changing in many ways, but I can also see both of these falling apart. Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri were thought to be g…
They should be marketed as mascots, and given playful, childish personalities. You wouldn't blindly trust a child, why would you an AI in its infancy?
Thank you. Now whenever I read output of a generative LLM, I will read it in my head with the confidently-wrong often-insane cadence of a toddler.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh please. As if the reputation of any news outlet even matters anymore. They all fired their real journalists and fact checkers long ago. Everything you read is full of inaccuracies, agenda pushing and misinformation. If you think it doesn’t, you’ve been had.
That's true of (commercial) news outlets. It doesn't apply to "everything you read". There are many ways to check facts that don't rely on news outlets, at least for people who have time and resources.
But relevant to the topic at hand, do any of those sources regularly make it onto the search engine results page? Is the quality of Forbes, Cnet, Reddit, Wikipedia and Quora clearly better than these AI generated responses in some way?
I know there are expert vetted information sources, but you generally have to pay for the quality and they do not get linked to from Bing and Google.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#130This isn't incorrect, it's just ambiguous. The JWST did indeed "take the first pictures" of a planet outside our solar system (https://www.npr.org/2023/01/12/1148626359/nasa-webb-telescop...). However, we have previously directly imaged other exoplanets using different instruments—it's just that this exoplanet in particular (LHS 475 b) has never been directly imaged before Webb.
It's the sort of question where you would expect an expert (or a thoughtful layperson with access to a search engine and a few minutes of spare time) to give a better, less ambiguous answer. However, since it is technically correct, I think it's a fairly minor sin in the grand scheme of popular science education, which commonly propagates actual falsehoods without the help of generative ML—e.g. iodine always sublimes rather than melting, aerodynamic lift relies on equal travel time of air on both sides of a curved airfoil, etc.
re: this particular ambiguity, one does wonder what the model was "thinking", but I suppose it doesn't matter because we'll never know.
---
I'm not sure if I think this technology is good or bad, because I don't really understand how most people use search engines. When I use them myself, I think I am fairly sensitive to ambiguities and logical contradictions, cross-checking multiple sources to extract a high-confidence answer or walking away if I'm not satisfied that I've found one. Most folks on HN are probably the same way, and I don't think generative ML can do better than us, yet.
On the other hand, will Bard's results be better or worse than e.g. taking the first Quora result as gospel? I would honestly guess that, on average, Bard (and ChatGPT, etc.) will do better. So, less critical users may get better results from these systems.
How many people are in the former camp, and how many in the latter? Of course, changing the dominant search paradigm will have an effect on all users. It also remains to be seen how the search vs. spammers arms race will evolve with the advent of generative ML search tools.