Live data from Hacker News

Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

twitter.com

161–170 of 234 posts

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#161
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm not a grammar expert but i think as a layperson there is a little bit of ambiguity in how a reader could interpret Bard's response. If i were writing i would probably specify "first ever picture". I think a lot of times words like "the first" are relative and context specific which the Bard answer lacks.

There is no ambiguity. We don't call Neil Armstrong "the first ever man on the moon". "The first" has a clear meaning and making any qualification of that implicit is either deceptive or bad writing.

i guess my take was that i find this a more excusable grammatical mistake than say getting a simple addition question wrong, which we've seen from gpt3. i could agree with "deceptive or bad writing" and maybe that's a more sinister error than something obvious wrong now that i think about it.

it's funny for me to think that i'm going out of my way to try and give Bard the same benefit of the doubt and work to try and find a way it could be right, the same way i would for a friend.

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#162
post #40

There was a lot of stories like "Webb captures it's fist ever picture of an exoplanet" [eg]. My guess is that it's digesting those and not understanding that the "it's" in that sentence is critical. Here is a prior example of an exoplanet picture: https://esahubble.org/images/heic0821a/ [eg] https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2022/09/01/nasas-webb-takes-its-...

I can't tell from the tweet why the Bard response is wrong. Is it because some other instrument has taken an image of an exoplanet, or because no instrument has ever done so? ChatGPT seems to believe it is the latter.

For what it's worth, ChatGPT is also wrong: https://i.imgur.com/CsQyEc2.png. The correct answer is https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/resources/300/2m1207b-first-imag... as techsupporter posted in a sibling comment

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#164
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, the “New Bing” AI results will not be unsourced but with key facts in sentences tagged in Wikipedia style, pointing towards the source URL. Finally, below the reply there will be a domain summary for an overview but where each domain name is clickable to get to the respective articles on said domains. In this case, Bing AI will operate very differently from ChatGPT.

In which case we would expect an LLM-based system to output something like, "(Fact that isn't true)[Source that does not make that claim but comes close enough that you wouldn't notice it just by skimming]" leading to even more people thinking it's true than otherwise.

Again this is already something that the human equivalents (low-end PR etc.) do all the time.

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#165

This is a great illustration of the risks of LLMs. As a user, if I am asking this question to a search engine, I definitely do not expect to need to fact-check the results. That's the whole reason to use the search engine in the first place! We're about to enter a dark ages of crappy AI products that are touted as game changing, outcompeting each other to be the best chatbot that can compose haiku about how grapes tu…

Why can't an LLM fact check itself somehow/someway?

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#167

I 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…

Maybe. The way I see it- whoever has the data wins in this new AI arms race. Google would have to make the biggest blunder in history to screw this up. It's not impossible but I wouldn't count them out. Their entire existence and practice of hoovering up all data has led to them this point.

We all “have the data”.

I build private models scraping the web. I’m iterating on my own virtual world generator using prompts, open source Vulkan renderer. Velocities, positions, color gradients; trivial to for loop your way to a massive DB with open libs.

Technologists are “screwing up” ogling Google/MS like passive consumer drones not seeing doing what Google and MS are doing is do-able at home with curl and open ML libs.

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#168

This is a great illustration of the risks of LLMs. As a user, if I am asking this question to a search engine, I definitely do not expect to need to fact-check the results. That's the whole reason to use the search engine in the first place! We're about to enter a dark ages of crappy AI products that are touted as game changing, outcompeting each other to be the best chatbot that can compose haiku about how grapes tu…

So i think the ability of the search engine to say "I don't know" is very important, and most of current chatgpt like models in the market don't have this feature.

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#169
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would LLMs be less monetizable than search? People are still going to want to buy goods and services, and being the place they go to find out about those goods and services will be just as valuable as it is today. Perhaps even more so, since LLMs are able to answer questions that are difficult to formulate as search queries.

Because most queries are not shopping queries. Yet ads are injected regardless to tempt you into buying something.

[dead]

Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

#170

I 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…

> I think it could be game changing in many ways, but I can also see both of these falling apart.

Like that time the Microsoft Twitter chatbot got tricked into parroting white supremacist talking points within an afternoon?

Post reply on HN