Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Adding 'Bard' Chatbot to Google Search, While Microsoft Debuts Updated ChatGPT Technology for Bing

Mousse said:
Ask grandma, brutha. Really old folks don't understand search engines only need a few keywords. Granny typically type in complete sentences in the search bar.🧐

Smaug is that you?😁 Still salty about the black arrow incident are we?🤭
Click to expand...

Very old people shouldn’t even use it. They get sucked into stupid conspiracy pages on Facebook that deliberately target their demographic. Then they start searching for 5G repellent tinfoil hats. In Eastern Europe they call this the ‘fascism of the babushkas’ who get brainwashed on the web and then start voting for corrupt oligarchs. We see something similar in the west.

They only need a push button phone for texting and a Netflix account on the TV.

I’m not joking. Until the whole misinfo space is cleared up, if it ever gets cleared up, I think retired people shouldn’t have the full web. They should go ballroom dancing with other retired people.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy and visualseed
dysamoria said:
That doesn’t seem like an explanation. Why would I want to have a conversation with a chat bot instead of directly providing me links to the content a search engine was meant to locate?
Click to expand...

If you Google "2+2" right now, Google's calculator returns "4" which is presumably what we would expect an AI chat bot to return. All the web sites returned on the first page of the search result are a random assortment of topics, but none of them are "4".

You don't have to have a conversation with it. You just need to ask it what you are looking for and the level of verboseness should be a lot less than scouring a webpage which may be outdated or wrong.
 
Bard is a ridiculous name to use, definitely not as catchy as Bing in comparison if that's what they are trying to do.
 
Apple loosening the grip on browsers for iOS just as the first salvos have been fired for the future of web. What gives ?
 
visualseed said:
If you Google "2+2" right now, Google's calculator returns "4" which is presumably what we would expect an AI chat bot to return. All the web sites returned on the first page of the search result are a random assortment of topics, but none of them are "4".

You don't have to have a conversation with it. You just need to ask it what you are looking for and the level of verboseness should be a lot less than scouring a webpage which may be outdated or wrong.
Click to expand...
The info the chat bot model is made from will be sourced from the same places and also be outdated. Example: ChatGPT knows nothing of current events after 2021. I just read this about it yesterday morning, on Wikipedia, so if the model was updated, that’s news to me, but it also will likely always have this kind of delay on content. At least until a training dataset can be updated in real time… which brings with it a number of challenges because of how the data is tagged, which has to be done because this isn’t AI; it’s an algorithm using statistical data models to disburse content that “looks” real.
 
DownUnderDan said:
Hey Siri
Click to expand...
Good example. There are so few things Siri is useful for. I mostly use Siri for quick math answers, setting timers, and reading my messages when my hands are busy. It constantly fails at these tasks in bizarrely stupid ways. Because that’s what this technology is: Artificial Stupidity.
 
MacWiz_007 said:
Whoever came up with 'Bard' should be fired.
Click to expand...
ANTM8.7+Shakespeare+cry.JPG
 
  • Haha
Reactions: compwiz1202, dysamoria, duffman9000 and 1 other person
I feel like the current versions of these "AI" will do nothing but enable lots of stupid people to be further misinformed. The clowns at Google and Microsoft have decided this is the future, but where is the evidence so far? If all these do is gather random text (possibly images?) and mix them together how will it ever be a reliable source of information? Also, who is authorizing them to copy text from written materials on other people's websites? I read that one of these genius bots was ripping off Getty images.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dysamoria
The more I learn about the tools being labeled “AI”, the more appalling the tech industry looks, and it’s already pretty appalling. Does everyone here, who’re all super positive about “chat AI” being inserted into web search engines, realize that people don’t actually know why generative models produce the outputs they produce? The most exciting and promoted generative tools use “blackbox” models. They’re non-determinate systems.

apple.news

Scientists Increasingly Can’t Explain How AI Works — VICE

AI researchers are warning developers to focus more on how and why a system produces certain results than the fact that the system can accurately and rapidly produce them.
apple.news apple.news

As well as being grossed out that there’s so much automatic trust put into something that its creators cannot actually explain, this also makes me laugh bitterly because this is ALREADY the state of our technically determinate software products, as a simple matter of their complexity being too great for any one human to fully grasp at any one time. There are so many interacting systems and APIs that regular “non-AI-labeled” software is ALREADY non-determinate in function. Not only does a company like Apple or Microsoft not CARE to put the time & effort into eliminating all the bugs in their products, there’s a good chance that they are unable to do so. The products have become unmanageable in size and complexity in order to serve the rapid release cycles and expectations of functionality that are driven by marketing and Wall Street pathology. They’re already almost Blackbox in their input vs output determinacy.

And here comes makers of the models and algorithms powering ChatGPT and Stable Diffusion saying “hold my beer”.

EDIT: Language folks: Do I want the word “deterministic” rather than “determinate”?

EDIT 2: I’m NOT saying this tech isn’t cool. I’m NOT saying it isn’t useful. I’m saying that inserting it into use cases like this is foolish and even dangerous, because we don’t have any real control over what the output produces or know why it does what it does. The consequences are already known from examples found around the web, such as several linked in this very rational article:

https://apple.news/Ay8J7cHp3SKePbhcV9ukOjg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: StellarVixen
NEPOBABY said:
The problem is not the village fool. Lots of smart people live in villages and farmers tend to be more science literate than city dwellers.

The problem is the conspiracy and quackery space is a multi billion dollar industry. It’s not run by village fools, it is run by wealthy urbanites who know how to scam people with misinformation.

They work together to misinform the public, gather donations from their followers, sell books, run pyramid schemes, sell useless supplements, and then with that wealth they organize even better.

It’s a grift by the wealthy for the wealthy.

Wikipedia and ”AI” won’t solve the problem with these grifters. They need to be penalized. But our ‘free speech’ society won’t do it because they turn around and say these penalities prove their conspiracy theories are true. They claim the ‘secret powers’ are trying to silence them.

They are already angry at ChatGPT and claiming it is ‘woke’ just because it debunks and dunks on conspiracy theories. Their response is to try to build “AI” trained on quackery, conspiracy theories and racism.
Click to expand...
What you are describing is not specifically "social media".
I agree with what you are saying, but social media is still the world stage for village fools.
The vast majority of people on social media are the village fools, not the grifters.
The fools are influenced by the grifters, but the fools are the ones that give the grifters their power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: compwiz1202
StellarVixen said:
Incorrect. ChatGPT has limited knowledge of events after 2021 not complete absence of any knowledge.
Click to expand...
Okay I’ll take your word for that. The article I read could’ve been mistaken. What’s your info source?

EDIT: This wasn’t meant to sound doubtful or critical.
 
Say what you will but nothing appears to have frightened Google so much as ChatGPT on Bing.
 
Here’s another issue to contend with. It’s not just the hallucinations and increased interaction being a problem with this proposed tech, it’s also the energy usage:

apple.news

Turns Out Using ChatGPT In Search Engines Would Have a Grisly Environmental Footprint — Futurism

Eco-Deadly As excitement over AI search technology surges ahead with Microsoft unveiling its ChatGPT powered Bing search engine, many are rightly asking the ethical and legal questions that come with using and creating it. But there's another worrying aspect of the technology that's received far...
apple.news apple.news
 
  • Wow
Reactions: NEPOBABY
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back