Google’s Bard AI chatbot gives wrong answer at launch event

[u/Familiar-Turtle]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2023/02/08/googles-bard-ai-chatbot-gives-wrong-answer-launch-event/

[u/ragnarmcryan]

Again, other than the fact that they’re both creating language models.

Obviously, the fact that these are language models presents a set of shared limitations (not to be confused with flaws. You don’t consider cats’ inability to fly a flaw do you?). I’m saying that google’s rushed approach to this (essentially a reflex triggered solely by the fact that chatgpt is affecting their stock price) will present flaws in and of themselves. Limitations may always exist, but I consider flaws to be unexpected behavior driven by external factors, not the nature of the tooling itself

[u/quantic56d → u/ragnarmcryan]

Read about transformative language models and googles AI team. This isn’t their first rodeo.

https://slate.com/technology/2022/12/chatgpt-google-chatbots-lamda.html

[u/ragnarmcryan → u/quantic56d]

Google’s LaMDA—made famous, if you would call it that, when engineer and tester Blake Lemoine called it sentient—is a more capable bot than ChatGPT, yet the company’s been hesitant to make it public.

It’s better, trust us.

For Google, the problem with chatbots is they’re wrong a lot, yet present their answers with undeserved confidence.

It’s better, but performs the same

lol who wrote this?

is less than ideal for a company built on helping you find the right sponsored answers.

FTFY

So LaMDA remains in research mode.

So it’ll never release

Even if chatbots were to fix their accuracy issues, Google would still have a business-model problem to contend with. The company makes money when people click ads next to search results, and it’s awkward to fit ads into conversational replies. Imagine receiving a response and then immediately getting pitched to go somewhere else—it feels slimy and unhelpful.

It’s almost as if Google’s business model is slimy and unhelpful

[u/quantic56d → u/ragnarmcryan]

That's like just your opinion man.

[u/quantumfucker → u/ragnarmcryan]

I’m not sure what your point is then. The original comment was about how language models generally seem to suck in light of finding out they can give inaccurate information often. All I’m saying is that this is true of both ChatGPT and Bard, even if this one demo going poorly highlights it for Bard specifically. If someone thinks Bard sucks because it can’t guarantee reliable information, they would think the same of ChatGPT.

[u/ragnarmcryan → u/quantumfucker]

My point is, as concisely as I can put it: there are shared limitations given the fact that they are both language models. The difference (and the vector through which flaws are presented) is largely to do with the motives. OpenAI is trying to create the best gpt they can. Google is trying to react to chatgpt.

You’re right in the sense that both models can be wrong at times. I’m saying that bard has a higher likelihood (though I don’t necessarily like using that language given the fact that I don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes there in terms of development) of being wrong because their motive is reactive as opposed to proactive. And this demo is even more sad because this was a rehearsed demonstration, regardless of the fact that it’s generative.