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

Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 459 posts

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#311

Post by la64710 »

npalli wrote: post #9

Here's the weird thing though, as discussed yesterday [1], the Microsoft demo was totally broken as well. In the end, everyone is looking for a big platform shift (next MOBILE!!!) and hype getting ahead of reality. When we look back in 3 months we will wonder why we thought LLM/GPT type queries will replace search in all forms. https://dkb.blog/p/bing-ai-cant-be-trusted

The main problem is ChatGPT had already caught the public’s imagination. A somewhat lame announcement of an upcoming product feature was actually a significant letdown from Google.In retrospect it may have been better if they stayed quiet for a while and then unveil something that everyone could try out and feel for themselves.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#312

Post by rightbyte »

voytec wrote: post #33
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft can botch their search without tanking the company. Google cannot.

Adtech is their main business. The quality of search suggests that it became less important to them.

Lower quality of search mean more ad clicks. I believe the quality decrease is on purpose.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#313

Post by nerpderp82 »

LesZedCB wrote: post #296
npalli wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, we don't know how useful it will turn out to be. While we are trading anecdotes, here's mine. I asked chatGPT who the Exec team of a medium sized company I knew, was. It confidently stated seven names. Turns out three of them it categorized under a different title and another three never even worked at the company! I would hardly call this a bootstrappble result. In your example, if I told that at rand…

with lang-chain and tooling, these problems will likely quickly shrink. imagine where we'll be just two papers down the line!

Everyone in this thread replying to npalli gets it. I am getting more and more skilled in using it everyday. I feel like I have a third lobe of my brain.

There are largely three groups of people

1) ChatWhat?

2) It only makes bullshit!

3) OMG, this amazing, and scary and amazing, and useful. Oh wow...

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#314

Post by astrea »

lvspiff wrote: post #14

Whats with everything being a dumpster fire nowadays? how about a simple hot mess? or what happened to a good ol hell in a hand-basket? or Ninth Circle Of Hell? I'm sure there are better euphemisms than the dumpster being on fhir as that indicates someone stoking it whereas the reality is more indecision and inaction causing confusion and demoralizing the teams.

Because our neural pathways are all overstimulated to the point of being fried and we need to turn things up to 11 to feel anything at all

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#315

Post by VirusNewbie »

I think people are too soon to make judgements. Zuck going all in on the metaverse might be one of the most brilliant and daring business moves of recent history, or it might be a poorly implemented dream of chasing Apple.

Google being 'second mover' to AI Chat might be the smart play, or it might be terrible.

I'm very surprised even here people aren't realizing we don't know how this plays out yet.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#316

Post by Zetice »

falcor84 wrote: post #289
Zetice wrote: post #163

Will anyone remember how Bard was released in 5 years, if it delivers on its promises? I doubt it, so the hand wringing over a stumble this early seems overblown.

Even though Windows 98 was an overall long-term success, the blue screen that popped up during their live demo left a memorable impression, and arguably led to a significantly slower adoption. Wikipedia that describes this as such [0]: > ...when presentation assistant Chris Capossela plugged a USB scanner in, the operating system crashed, displaying a Blue Screen of Death. Bill Gates remarked after derisive applause…

So in other words, no it’s ultimately not important if the idea is good, which Bard seems to be.

It seems more indicative of leadership quality that Google had this in their back pocket, ready to go shortly after someone else did the market validation for them.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#317

Post by erik_seaberg »

mersenne wrote: post #304
npalli wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, we don't know how useful it will turn out to be. While we are trading anecdotes, here's mine. I asked chatGPT who the Exec team of a medium sized company I knew, was. It confidently stated seven names. Turns out three of them it categorized under a different title and another three never even worked at the company! I would hardly call this a bootstrappble result. In your example, if I told that at rand…

You’re not using ChatGPT correctly.

As the saying goes, you’re holding it wrong.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#318

Post by vnrao »

npalli wrote: post #9

Here's the weird thing though, as discussed yesterday [1], the Microsoft demo was totally broken as well. In the end, everyone is looking for a big platform shift (next MOBILE!!!) and hype getting ahead of reality. When we look back in 3 months we will wonder why we thought LLM/GPT type queries will replace search in all forms. https://dkb.blog/p/bing-ai-cant-be-trusted

> When we look back in 3 months we will wonder why we thought LLM/GPT type queries will replace search in all forms.

I really hope so. LLM for search seems like a big leap right now. It isn't even really search but just a UI change for interacting with the underlying search engine. The caveats being that the people who actually think and create don't gain the clicks that they would get today (with the accompanying ad revenue) and there are no citations.

I really hope more companies realize that LLM for Wikimedia sites would be a vastly superior application of the technology. Could you imagine the impact this application would have given the sheer amount of knowledge and data that is on these sites? Learning and teaching would be changed from virtually the ground up. IMO, this is the killer app and not general search. Given the extreme verbosity and general un-readability of many technical pages on Wikipedia, a LLM that can summarize and answer questions correctly is a huge paradigm shift. Oh,don't know what the Second Law of Thermodynamics is? Here you go. In whatever length of text you want. Want to know how this relates to Information Theory? Okay, here's a primer on that. The internet can once more become a place that people come to for learning rather than being fed total crap by an algorithm.

I do have to commend Satya Nadella though. He and Microsoft know exactly what they are doing. They know Google and Sundar Pichai are on the backfoot and they really are making them "dance". Bing + ChatGPT isn't really scalable right now. Riding the hype wave and putting pressure on Google hoping they make poor decisions based on short-minded thinking is the best thing they can do right now. Looks like it's working out well for them.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#319

Post by Der_Einzige »

mrstone wrote: post #195

I think LLMs are great, but most companies have not figured out what they are truly useful for. Hint: it's not for search. LLMs are not knowledge databases, and should not be relied on for unknown information. In my opinion, they are more useful 24/7 editing service. Write a paragraph and ask it to paraphrase. Ask it to make a new story that can be edited. If you don't have any idea what the answer to the thing you'r…

Search can be achieved reasonably well using LLM embeddings to draw edges in a knowledge graph, which is called a "Semantic Knowledge Graph".

But your broader point remains, LLMs are a small improvement for search technology and a quantum leap forward for editing, cheating on leetcode, consulting, etc.

Re: Google employees criticize CEO for “dumpster fire” response to ChatGPT

#320

Post by thefaux »

Veen wrote: post #292
npalli wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, we don't know how useful it will turn out to be. While we are trading anecdotes, here's mine. I asked chatGPT who the Exec team of a medium sized company I knew, was. It confidently stated seven names. Turns out three of them it categorized under a different title and another three never even worked at the company! I would hardly call this a bootstrappble result. In your example, if I told that at rand…

I think of these tools as "first draft writers". You can't rely on OpenAI's GPT models to do your research for you or replace knowledge of a particular domain, but they significantly accelerate the initial content drafting process. Then you edit and fact-check and adapt, as you would anyway, but you've cut out much of the time-consuming grind of getting words on the page.

There is something that I find deeply unsatisfying about this. For me, the first draft is as much about working through the problems space and considering possibilities. If I rely on a chat bot, then I am more apt to become anchored to whatever the chat bot spits back out at me. Even if what it produces is good enough, I do not benefit from the drafting process in the way that I would if I did it myself. Sometimes maybe this is a good enough shortcut but I generally don't believe in shortcuts.
Post reply on HN