[flagged]
They usually wait for third parties to invest significant energy into it first.
Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
21–30 of 234 posts
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#22I 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…
[dead]
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#23At least it's being honest about LLM capabilities. If it only showed 100% facts, that would be false advertising.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#24I 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…
Google Assistant and Siri were liked by the press, but not by me. In contrast, ChatGPT has helped me out more than a few times.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
We fact check search engine results all the time. But most of the time, such fact checking is in the form of looking at a result, considering whether it seems like a credible source, seeing if multiple credible-seeming results have the same answer, etc. Getting a completely untrustworthy, unsourced response seems worse than useless. Google has been going this way for a while, with its instant answers or whatever, but…
We're slow-motion singing on to a future with a fundamental shift to receiving information in a completely opaque manner. A few sources will control the information we get in a much more direct and extreme way than now, that conscious skepticism will no longer be able to defend. Whatever handwaved promises we get now will be gone ten years from now. If there wasn't such a gee-whiz coolness factor about conversational…
> We're slow-motion singing on to a future with a fundamental shift to receiving information in a completely opaque manner.
There's nothing fundamentally new about this. The average person is blissfully unaware of the conversations being had between powerful individuals, PR experts, producers, and so on about how said person should be manipulated.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#26This 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…
When I ask ChatGPT a question, it explains it's reasoning and gives me concepts I can follow up with googling to learn more.
When I use Google for research, I get articles written for SEO to push products and often have to refine and refine and refine to get something useful, which I then can follow up by googling to learn more. With difficulty.
Honestly I don't know how much I'd use ChatGPT if I had the internet of 2016 and Google.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#27This 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…
I would definitely fact check search results as much as AI, especially the info snippets that appear at the top of Google's SERPs.
For example, until a few months the results for "pork cooked temperature" and "chicken cooked temperature" were returning incorrect values, boldly declaring too low of a temperature right at the top of the page (I know these numbers can vary based on how long the meat is at a certain temperature, but I verified Google was parsing the info incorrectly from the page it was referencing, pulling the temperature for the wrong kinds of meat). This was potentially dangerous incorrect info IMO
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#28[flagged]
18 months to 3 years.
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#29I 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…
Google Assistant and Siri were liked by the press, but not by me. In contrast, ChatGPT has helped me out more than a few times.
Same here. I treat ChatGPT as another Wikipedia or Stack Overflow. I know that the content is not fact checked by experts and I need to judge it accordingly. But just like Wikipedia can get you started on a topic, ChatGPT can do the same, plus you can ask follow up clarifying questions!
Re: Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad
#30This 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…
We fact check search engine results all the time. But most of the time, such fact checking is in the form of looking at a result, considering whether it seems like a credible source, seeing if multiple credible-seeming results have the same answer, etc. Getting a completely untrustworthy, unsourced response seems worse than useless. Google has been going this way for a while, with its instant answers or whatever, but…
Instant answers seem like a cautionary example since Google has gotten a fair amount of flack over the cases where it inaccurately summarized content. I think these services are going to be very interesting to study whether the average person thinks they're more authoritative because they're branded by a huge corporation and whether that'll decline over time as people realize the limitations.