51–60 of 81 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rather it's because one can't be sure that the product still exists in 24 months
I'm pretty sure that GPT powered bots are here to stay -- this is not like Google+
I don't think Google will win this race, not because they lack the technical expertise, but because they are too cheap. This is so telling: "We’re releasing it initially with our lightweight model version of LaMDA. This much smaller model requires significantly less computing power, enabling us to scale to more users, allowing for more feedback" They are richer than Croesus, that is no reason for them to hold back an…
[flagged]
I don't think Google will win this race, not because they lack the technical expertise, but because they are too cheap. This is so telling: "We’re releasing it initially with our lightweight model version of LaMDA. This much smaller model requires significantly less computing power, enabling us to scale to more users, allowing for more feedback" They are richer than Croesus, that is no reason for them to hold back an…
It’s either that, or they’re secretly incompetent and can’t compete with openai. They are behind
It's been weird. They started out a head-neck-and-torso above everyone else in competence. Interviews were neigh impossible, and it was a hyper-elite team and a dream work environment.
Then they screwed up, and hired a fifth of a million people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. I asked Bard why it wasn't as chatty at Bing or chatgpt and this was the response. > I am still under development, and I am not as chatty as ChatGPT or Bing Chat because I have not been trained on as much data. I am also not as good at understanding and responding to complex questions. However, I am learning and improving every day, and I will become more chatty over time.
Do you believe it was sharing a fact? My understanding is that producing shorter responses proportionally reduces the amount of computing—and thus the cost—required to produce it.
I don't think Google will win this race, not because they lack the technical expertise, but because they are too cheap. This is so telling: "We’re releasing it initially with our lightweight model version of LaMDA. This much smaller model requires significantly less computing power, enabling us to scale to more users, allowing for more feedback" They are richer than Croesus, that is no reason for them to hold back an…
The actual product is the user interactions. ChatGPT etc is trained on examples in the thousands. What google will be doing is trying to get 100s of millions of labelled interactions by getting the users to do it for them. Then they’ll use those to train its final model.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/chatgpt-sets-record-faste...
Bard is not an answer to ChatGPT. Bard is similar to Bing Chat. You can ask recent questions, and it will give you answers based on search results.
What distinction are you drawing between ChatGPT and Bing? That's not what Google says. Google describes it like ChatGPT, plus some meaningless fluff. The only thing. It says about "answers" is that they are wrong. """ Meet Bard: your creative and helpful collaborator, here to supercharge your imagination, boost your productivity, and bring your ideas to life. Bard is an experiment and may give inaccurate or inapprop…
Too little too late, and even the wrong focus topic to survive as a company. Google is done. No one cares anymore what google does, its either inferior to alternatives and/or on the graveyard soon anyways. Time to move on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's pretty surprising it can't do the months in alphabetical order. I just tried with LLaMA 30B. This is running on my MacBook Air with llama.cpp, quantized to 4 bits, and is a "raw" model (not alpaca / instruction tuned at all). Obviously some models will be better at some things (and will have different outputs given the same inputs) and worse at other, but you'd think Bard would be able to do that pretty simple…
gpt4: months in alphabetical order Here are the months in alphabetical order: April August December February January July June March May November October September
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's pretty surprising it can't do the months in alphabetical order. I just tried with LLaMA 30B. This is running on my MacBook Air with llama.cpp, quantized to 4 bits, and is a "raw" model (not alpaca / instruction tuned at all). Obviously some models will be better at some things (and will have different outputs given the same inputs) and worse at other, but you'd think Bard would be able to do that pretty simple…
Months are not in alphabetical order. And largest city is an ambiguous answer: per area, moskow is, by population its istanbul.
Google looks to be caught in an innovator dilemma. They can’t roll out a good chat system comparable to its competitors because it directly competes with their core revenue stream of search. From my angle, LLM’s are the next big step in search. If the company whose core business revolves around search can’t update their product to meaningfully compete with their competitors who view search as a side business, it shou…
That's one way to look at it. The other is the immense advertising opportunity these systems can provide. You no longer need to perform multiple queries and various results to get your answer. You're now essentially in a walled garden. The search/LLM platform has your complete and undivided attention.
After providing an answer, the follow-up can be a relevant ad. It is important for their credibility to not make it seem like the ad is impacting the integrity of the result.
They already have a moat being an established player with existing agrements. Google was able to pull this off with traditional search. They are probably best currently positioned to do it again.
Edit: Something else to consider, does Google have the same DNA that they did in the early 2000s?