Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google's Bard shows incorrect information in its launch ad

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 234 posts

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

#201

Post by qikInNdOutReply »

partiallypro wrote: post #18

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 wonder how AI SEO will look like. Bribe click workers to allow advertising to pass through in the ground truth data ?

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

#202

Post by harriet1 »

partiallypro wrote: post #18

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…

[dead]

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

#203

Post by TecoAndJix »

qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #201
partiallypro wrote: post #18

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 wonder how AI SEO will look like. Bribe click workers to allow advertising to pass through in the ground truth data ?

One way I imagine this is that answers will have “helpful” postfixes after them. When the user interacts with the postfix prompts it serves pay-to-play dialogue. Advertisers can just bid on spots in a decision table. Simple example: a user asks “How do I best take care of roses in my location”? The ChatGPT/Bard answer is delivered then analyzed for keywords/themes that someone may want to advertise on. At the end of the answer (These results may be sponsored. Learn more) - Do you need help finding the nutrients mentioned in this response?

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

#204

Post by fennecfoxy »

Izkata wrote: post #179
Consultant32452 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'll have to invent a new form of busy work to justify head count.

In Kino's Travels (I guess nowadays Kino's Journey ), there was one country in the first anime adaptation where people no longer needed to work because the system/computer/whatever it was called did it all for them, so they spent all their time confirming its correctness.

I fucking LOVE Kino's Journey, nobody else I've met has ever seen it!

TIME TO REWATCH YET AGAIN

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

#205

Post by Gigachad »

rhaway84773 wrote: post #103
enobrev wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri were thought to be good at launch In my own experience, Alexa and Google's query pucks were improving for a short time, and then got considerably worse, losing features every month until they basically stopped understanding or responding to anything but the simplest requests. A couple months after released, they expanded android auto with the same abilities, so I could "ok go…

I’m not sure Siri ever got as good as the original Siri app that Apple bought. Maybe the custom triggers are an advancement but it has spent most of its life chasing the original Siri.

Siri is such a disappointment. It fails on things that seem like they should be trivial like unit conversions. Pretty much only good for setting timers and making phone calls now.

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

#206

Post by Gigachad »

jonas21 wrote: post #132
ren_engineer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I do think there is unique break here though, because I feel that SEO has so thoroughly ruined search in many regards that this -could- be the right moment for this. the problem here is monetization, will search even be profitable if LLMs are used for most queries? It might become a Uber/Lyft or food delivery situation where these companies aren't really able to profitably deliver the service. I don't see many peopl…

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.

Probably because they are too expensive. I heard it costs 7 cents per query on average for ChatGPT. That’s more than ads pay.

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

#207

Post by scrollaway »

williamcotton wrote: post #84

Anyone remember Google panicking after Facebook took off so they bought Orkut and rushed out a crappy “social app development environment”?

I think it's funny that in a thread about LLMs offering up incorrect information as factual, there's a bunch of anecdotes that present incorrect information as factual.

You kinda did what an LLM does: Took a bunch of contextual cues (Orkut was owned by Google and ultimately shut down; Google often has knee-jerk reactions to the industry; Google started Google+ as a way to compete with Facebook; Google often buys companies as a way to compete), and spat out a confidently-wrong, summarized autocomplete based on that: "Google bought Orkut as a knee-jerk reaction to compete with Facebook!"

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

#208

Post by SilverBirch »

Whilst it's funny this showed up in the advert, we do kind of need to temper expectations. These products are meant to be "Artificial Intelligence" - they will get things wrong just like normal intelligent people. This is why it's kind of why they're not well suited for search, because people who are searching for stuff need to be make their own judgement about the credibility of a source. Sometimes I need a high level of confidence sometimes not. If what you're expecting is for it to be artificially intelligent and omniscient, you're waiting for us to design God.

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

#209

Post by abdulhaq »

unholythree wrote: post #181
enobrev wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri were thought to be good at launch In my own experience, Alexa and Google's query pucks were improving for a short time, and then got considerably worse, losing features every month until they basically stopped understanding or responding to anything but the simplest requests. A couple months after released, they expanded android auto with the same abilities, so I could "ok go…

I wonder if they nerfed their assistants because paths that are too autonomous too easily wander into PR nightmares. Carefully curated results and behavior isn't going to spontaneously generate content actual human beings would consider offensive or prejudiced. People are pretty eager to pull out their pitchforks, and "Big Tech Builds Vile Hate Bot" make a excellent click-bate headline every time.

The production of prejudiced content by "AI"s is a real issue and not just a problem of click-bait headlines

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

#210

Post by latexr »

andrewstuart wrote: post #166

If you are expecting AI to be correct then you are holding it wrong. The correct way to relate to AI is to listen and if the answer matters, verify.

> If you are expecting AI to be correct then you are holding it wrong.

That’s not the message and expectation we’re being given, these models are being hailed as the future today. When something really bad happens because someone over relied on these systems, hand waving with “well, you shouldn’t have expected the answer to be right” won’t cut it.

> The correct way to relate to AI is to listen and if the answer matters, verify.

If the answer doesn’t matter, why are we asking? And if we need to verify, what’s the point of asking the AI?

Post reply on HN