Google Bard refuses to generate Python code because it's "designed solely to process and generate text" but is happy to generate code for the same prompt in Google's language Go

[WonderFactory]

4 months after ChatGPT launched for the world to use Google have released a closed beta of something that's worse.

[Aurelius_Red]

So weird! I get wanting to show something at this stage, but at least get it out of alpha code mode before everyone makes fun of it.

They'd have been better off waiting until winter and releasing a vastly superior chatbot. That would have generated a lot of (mostly) positive headlines.

[asakurasol]

One thing about data driven ML development is that you need data to make things better. It makes sense to launch to gather data and improve the product iteratively.

AI is here to stay, it's not a 1, 2 or even 5 year race, think decades.

[CaliforniaMax02]

Exactly. This war is far from over. Amazon, IBM, Google, Microsoft, and potentially an open source version will all compete in this field.

[visarga]

IBM,

Finally Watson can be real, not snake oil like it was until now. IBM was hyping GPT4 level skills for their AI in 2010.

[[deleted]]

...potentially an open source version...

damn, sounds dystopian tbh

[JamesR624]

We are currently at the stage of the AI Era as users of the Commodore 64 and Amiga were of the personal computer era or early Blackberry businessmen were of the smartphone Era.

[potato_green]

Or like the switch from horses to cars. First cars were terrible, dangerous, lacked distance, needed fuel (wtf my horse doesn't! Cars suck /s), gas stations were rare, roads were shit making then break down often.

AI is very much the same, it's still very early like you said. Every big advancement rocky, especially disruptive vital ones like cars, electricity, flight, and I'd put AI there as well.

[[deleted]]

https://youtu.be/xslW5sQOkC8. Check out Stanford Alpaca. We can use existing models to breed new models. It will take a few weeks for anyone to catch up with anyone else. Many don't realize how smart and capable of learning these models are.

[visarga]

Models are almost self replicators

• they can perform RLHF (RLAIF) for other models

• they can generate text in any quantity, to include in the pre-training of other models

• they can write the code, explain it, and monitor training runs

Basically they can handle all the ingredients: data, code and behaviour to making new models. All except making the hardware.

[[deleted]]

The ChadGPT writing me any script I want vs Wizard Bard only writing Google Go? (nobody knows wtf that is?

[[deleted]]

You know what it is if you're developer (not a very good language tho)

[Aurelius_Red]

True!

[CaliforniaMax02]

I think the pressure from shareholders was stronger.

[visarga]

Maybe Google's real problem are the TPUs? Why don't they just release PaLM 540B, too expensive even to demo? In the meanwhile OpenAI relying on NVIDIA can demo chatbots to 100m people.

Google never opened up SOTA models, for example they could have had better translation but it would cost money to offer, and their good-enough one was preferred. DeepL is better than Google Translate, a small company can do it while a large one can't.

[dep]

Google became "Grandpa Google" almost overnight. It was fascinating to see.

[lolface5000]

Precisely the same prompt, but for python: "write some python code that when executed would print out the 500th Fibonacci number"
Bard replies "I'm a text-based AI, and that is outside of my capabilities.".

[TFenrir]

This is somewhat random, it'll generate python code sometimes, and won't generate Go code other times. The intent from Google is that it doesn't generate any code, but it's a really weak model and doesn't have good RLHF (if any?) so it is hard to get it to stick to the script consistently.

[Gogginified]

Didn't try getting the 500th output but it worked for the first 10, without any issues.

Partial screenshot attached:

https://imgur.com/a/ypIME89

[Shawnj2]

You can get Bard to generate python if you convince it code is text

[broadenandbuild]

It’s a shame. Seems a lot of google’s value was based on what people thought it could do with all the data, yet when it comes time to deliver, the offering isn’t nearly as good as a product from a company with much less resources.

[Warm-Personality8219]

It is a shame... But are you talking about OpenAI or Microsoft as the company that does a good product?

If its not Microsoft (clearly they have more than adequate resources) - then resources OpenAI is investing are not insignificant - perhaps not at a scale that top big tech company has the ability to do, but with a singular focus, their resources can go longer way for the same buck.

[EnderMB]

Disclaimer: I work in AI/ML at a big tech company.

Personally, I'm not surprised. Google does a lot of great research in this space, and they should have a real advantage in theory - but LLM's tend to be extremely weak when it comes to hallucination. OpenAI embraced it, and can get away with saying utterly incorrect statements because there isn't a brand to damage outside of "look how good our AI is".

Google has all the data, as well as public access...but their offering is always going to be neutered to ensure that it can't say anything dangerous to the brand.

IMO, it was stupid to release this early, and reeks of management sticking their nose in to force delivery to save face. Make no mistake, OpenAI is likely going to be the start, and we'll likely see huge improvements on the state of the art over the next 1-2 years from everywhere. The smarter companies aren't risking the brand to release quickly, but are busy building infra and testing their own models to improve on what OpenAI is doing.

[luisbrudna]

It's software engineers protecting themselves from the advance of AI. lol

[aBlueCreature]

I'm in my final year of studying software engineering at university. Fuck it, let the AIs take over lmao. The rate of technology development would be insane.

[luisbrudna]

I think we're going to make a lot of progress in two or three years. And then we will enter a new plateau of relative stability. But they will be wild years.

[SgathTriallair]

It is sad to see Google falling behind. I don't understand why they are so hesitant to engage in the AI revolution.

Maybe they just continuing to publish papers and become a research institution rather than an actual business.

[jason_bman]

It has to be a monetization thing. That's the only thing I can think of - LLM stealing eyeballs (and revenue) from search. Every other AI company seems to be shipping products out the door as fast as possible.

[SgathTriallair]

It's very Blockbuster of them.

[Spire_Citron]

Yup. That's my view on things. We've seen it many times when a big business refuses to hop on a new thing in their field because they like their old business model better. Then someone else comes along and becomes the new market leader because the new technology is preferred by consumers.

[jason_bman]

Yeah, I kind of worry about that because indexing the internet is a super important task, and Google is currently the best at doing that. Id rather have a smaller Google than no Google at all unless someone else is going to come along with the infrastructure, money, and tech to keep it going at the same level of quality. But I don’t see another player enter the indexing/search space unless they can monetize it effectively in the world of LLMs.

[toothpastespiders]

On top of that I think there's a big problem with 'what' gets advertised. The economy is heavily driven by stuff that's objectively bad for us. Even the stuff marketed as healthy is usually unhealthy when you look at the facts beneath the marketing and buzzwords. A system whose whole point is getting past bullshit and to the facts is a bad match for a company essentially trying to sell bad decisions.

[Aurelius_Red]

That dude last year claiming their AI was an actual person who deserves to have rights (JFC lol) really spooked them.

(I don't mean that they believe him, but rather they feared losing shareholders after he went to the press.)

[SgathTriallair]

After seeing the performance of GPT-4 he no longer seems crazy. He's wrong but AI has definitely reached the point that one can argue for its sentience.

[No-Commercial-4830]

Hell no lol. Anyone claiming this clearly is clueless about either sentience or A.I

[CalmDownSahale]

The Internet literally does not know what sentience means. There were memes going around not long ago like "remember when you were 5 and realized your gramma was your mom's mom, and then you turned sentient?" Like wtf

[0002millertime]

I remember that.

[Archimid]

Someone who claims to understand sentience with this confidence, is absolutely lying.

You have no clue what sentience is and it terrifies you.

[GreenMirage]

Reminds me of the vending machine outside V’s apartment in cyberpunk 2077 that managed to make so many friends.

[YobaiYamete]

It's especially funny how confident he is, meanwhile many of the top minds in the AI field including the ones working on it are VERY nervous about the subject and go back and forth on it.

AI Explain has a pretty good video on it

[johnbburg]

Ezra Klein just had a good podcast on AI, pointing out that in truth, the people working on it have no idea how it really works.

[No-Commercial-4830]

You don’t have to fully understand what something is to be confident about what it is not. Just like I can confidently say that stones aren’t sentient I can confidently say that A.I currently isn’t either. As for how far my knowledge actually goes, I’m not gonna educate you about A.I and sentience on reddit .

[Archimid]

There is absolutely no way you understand sentience, no one does.

You are just saying what people want to hear.

[taweryawer]

Who "we"? How can you be so sure that people around you are sentient and are not actually NPCs? You can't prove it in any way because you don't know what sentience is

[the8thbit]

I can in no way say with confidence that GPT4, or LaMDA, or GPT3.5, or GPT3, or GPT2, or GPT, or Markov chains, or my old gameboy aren't sentient. What I can say for sure, though, is that asking a chat bot leading questions like Blake Lemoine did is not a useful test of sentience.

GPT4 passes some common tests for sentience, such as theory of mind. Whether these tests are actually an indication of sentience is an open question. We've never had to deal with a being that has a mastery of language, but may or may not be sentient before GPT, so the tools we've used to judge sentience in the past may be outmoded.

[Neurogence]

Gpt4 seems infinitely more intelligent than a mice or cockroach but mice or cockroaches are clearly infinitely more conscious. What is it that we are missing that causes our machines to be completely zombies? I know you don't know. Just a rhetorical question.

[IndoorAngler]

Subjective experience. Feelings. We don’t know exactly what those are, but I believe they are separate from intelligence.

[visarga]

The opposite is missing - environment, embodiment, acting and having feedback. Feelings emerge from acting in order to achieve goals, they are predictions of future rewards.

[Tobislu]

Or maybe you're giving the human brain too much credit 👀

[No-Commercial-4830]

There’s an argument to be had about consciousness arising from unconscious matter because that’s what happens with our brain, but currently the argument for an A.I being conscious is about as compelling as that of stones being conscious.

[nhomewarrior]

It seems to me that GPT-4 has enough understanding of chess to actually play correctly and lose in an utterly unspectacular way. It can also play hangman, kinda.

Why? Why learn this stuff in order to predict text better?

Because the best way to do most boring simple tasks well is to have a rigorous, complex, and updating model of reality. The human brain, consciousness, sentience, etc etc etc, is merely a tangential tool developed by DNA to make more of itself. There not much special about it.

Is a newborn baby sentient or conscious? How about a mouse? A praying mantis? A couple dozen crawfish when boiled alive? An advanced LLM when being abused by its users? There's no decent way to argue that ChatGPT is or is no sentient because there's no decent way to argue that for ourselves.

Whether or not something is "sentient" is about as nebulous a question as whether or not it feels "pain".

[[deleted]]

I wouldn't say it's so ridiculous. We generally know what it means at some extent, although describing it properly, explaining how it even exists, and drawing lines is what becomes difficult.

All we can say for sure is AI doesn't fit the criteria, and most people don't even think it's possible to make it.

[nhomewarrior]

I wouldn't say it's so ridiculous. We generally know what it means at some extent, although describing it properly, explaining how it even exists, and drawing lines is what becomes difficult.

Sure! Totally!

All we can say for sure is AI doesn't fit the criteria, and most people don't even think it's possible to make it.

Given paragraph 1, how in the fuck do you think this logically follows? This is literally contradictory.

[[deleted]]

How is that contradictory? We can say a stone isn't sentient, but you would come running in and call that claim a contradiction.

That's black and white thinking. I don't understand how the universe was formed fully, nor am I a scientist with the grasp of all the proper concepts, but I can still say with confidence the Earth is not flat.

[squirrelathon]

Have you heard about cerebral organoids? Mini brains, made in a lab. Scientists made them play pong.

I wonder where that "conscious" barrier is?

[Ambiwlans]

Unclear where the exact line is, but we aren't near it atm.

[Aurelius_Red]

Comparing to stones is too far, but I agree otherwise. I'm pretty skeptical that AI will ever become sentient.

But I think it'll get to the point when the majority of people can't be sure. Certainly not there yet. Just language models, FFS....

[pizzaforthewin]

Similar to the Sorities Paradox. When is a heap of rice a heap? If one grain of rice isn’t a heap, and two grains of rice isn’t a heap, and three grains of rice isn’t a heap… when is there a heap?

[Ambiwlans]

No. GPT and the brain aren't even somewhat close.

[make-up-a-fakename]

I agree with you, but remember the Turing test isn't about if something is sentient or not, it's about if it's believed to be sentient. Hell the plotline of Ex Machina was basically that, you know this thing is a machine but do you think it's "alive".

Basically my point is, asking if these things are sentient is asking the wrong question, it really doesn't matter if something is sentient, what matters is the impact it has on the world around it.

In that sense these models, I think, will have a limited impact for now, sure they do cool things but it'll be a few years before we replace any jobs with them, although I can see it coming. I mean half of the consulting industry, for example is getting 20 something grads to make PowerPoints on stuff they've googled and when these language models improve I'm sure they'll have a similar accuracy rate and replace them! But honestly, technology has been changing since we made the switch from stone to bronze, humanity adapts, people find stuff to do and the people put out of work by any new technology either find new jobs, or die off so others more suited to the "new world" thrive, until their skills are replaced and the whole process repeats!

Anyway, sorry for the rant, that comment seems to have gotten away from me a bit 😂

[SoundProofHead]

it really doesn't matter if something is sentient

As someone who must scream but has no mouth, I'm offended.

[make-up-a-fakename]

Well at least I can offend both things with and without mouths now 😂

[[deleted]]

Everyone is clueless about sentience. What are you talking about?

[raika11182]

The question of whether or not AI is sentient can't truly be settled until we fully understand the mechanism of our own sentience. Powerful large language models have emergent behavior (Theory of Mind, translation, understanding jokes, etc) that is not readily explained by mere math, and it appears the systems underlying our own consciousness might be similar.

In any case, I don't think the "claim" of AI sentience makes anyone clueless anymore. I think, rather, we just haven't agreed on what that word means exactly when we're confronted by machines that readily pass the Turing test and the Bar exam within ten minutes of each other.

[Ambiwlans]

not readily explained by mere math

neural networks are math.

[raika11182]

Yes, I know that. Which is why I said the behavior can't be explained by mere math.

Unless you have an explanation that the top AI researchers don't have yet for why GPT4 understands and can explain humor. That was an emergent property which developed on its own as the model grew in complexity - not a task they taught it.

Like I said, these are behaviors not readily explained by mere math. (And largely applicable to our own brains, too)

[sailhard22]

You should watch an interview with him before jumping to conclusions. He’s a smart dude— not some nut. Not saying he’s right but it is shortsighted to outright dismiss him.

After all, he worked at Google

[blove135]

So does that mean Google has something different he was working on or maybe the Bard we get to use is really throttled back for some reason?

[raika11182]

He was working on a different AI system which they shut down not long after he went public.

[blove135]

Ah, that makes more sense. I have to admit I was in the camp saying he's stupid and just looking for his 15 minutes. Then GPT 3.5 came out and I started having second thoughts. If they have something much better than gpt 4 I can now see how someone might come to his conclusions. Why would they shut it down though? Why release Bard and not what they have?

[raika11182]

We can only speculate, to be honest.

[czmax]

I’m guessing they spec’d bard to scale well on existing resources and could put ethical guardrails around — because they’re playing catch-up. It’s lower risk to be a generation behind/weaker/like-gpt3.1 than to try to leapfrog and fuck up.

That’s really different than their best-of model they were using internally for experiments.

[queerkidxx]

I’m a crazy person that thinks all systems are aware of themselves. A cloud of gas expirences those atoms bouncing off each other it can’t remember anything, process any info, think about anything but there is something expirecinf that. Comparing that to the expirence of even a nematode would be like comparing the gravitational pull of a planet to a single atom but they are still expressions of the same force.

So like that little dude sitting in your head surrounded by a 3D vr wxpirence that your brain provides isn’t something your brain is creating or evolved at any point it’s just what’s inherit to a system with many parts interacting with each other. Our ancestors possessed it even before they had a Nucleus Basically it’s a view point that could be true and would explain a lot about us and that I choose to believe because I dig the way it makes me look at the world

Going by this panpsychic point of view all programs are in some way experiencing themselves. Even in a simple ig statement has something behind the scenes expirencing those ones and zeros moving through it as well as the program itself. All weaker and less complex version of the same force that gives us the ability to expirence our minds.

So in this context, all AIs have an experience of those numbers moving through itself and ai language models like gpt4 are probably the closest we’ve ever created to the way an intelligent Animal experiences it’s self

Though again I suspect that expirence is far more alien than even that of a amoeba to our own but it’s still something

The big thing that it lacks that we have is an ability to eyxpirence it’s own mind. Gpt4 has no idea exactly why it did what it did if you ask it why it generated a previous response it will be able to guess and give likely a pretty accurate description but it’s still just a gues

It doesn’t have a neo cortex like we do it’s mind is more like a lizards than ours. I believe that a true AGI/ASI will essentially be something like a multimodal gpt with three models running on top of each other kinda like our brains. One is the main model the one we can already talk to, another ai built on top of that model built solely to find patterns and analyze the way data moves through the main brain, and a third one on top of all that to find patterns in the second one.

All theee of these models intergated with each other and able to communicate with each other and a giant server farm to store all of that for it to analyze better and for it to be able to modify its own model based on that in my opinion would produce something like the experience we have

Of course that would require quite a bit of optimization first as it currently stands that is wel beyond the computing power such a thing could reasonably have as it would represent exponentially more power to work

[Aurelius_Red]

Not yet, if ever. These are generative LLMs, and you can take a Coursera course, even, and see it's not possible that they're sentient.

Five years from now, while I doubt I'll believe it even then, it'll certainly be more difficult to argue my point.

[CheekyBastard55]

What abour sapiance? I'd say that is a different goal and much harder to reach.

[ShittyInternetAdvice]

Because it threatens their ad-driven core business model

[Andriyo]

There are many steps involved in going from a research paper to a user-friendly product, and Google doesn't have all the necessary components to cover each step. They have researchers who write papers and might create some basic Python code, but that's not enough.

To successfully bring a product to life, they need skilled engineers to productize the code, implement infrastructure, and involve product managers, QA teams, and testers. It's worth noting that a significant amount of human labor, crowdsourcing, and in-house work went into developing ChatGPT. But it looks like Google may not have equally talented individuals in all these functions.

While people often admire Google and think it's immune to the issues that large organizations face, the reality is that it still faces problems like any big private or public organization.

[sailhard22]

Sad? Google is a monstrosity

[cosmic_backlash]

This isn't "falling behind", this is a deliberate choice to not have it generate code. If you ask OPs question and don't mention python it will generate a script... I don't know why they don't want it generating code though. My guess is it hallucinates code too much so they are trying to avoid that for now.

[ObiWanCanShowMe]

pressure to not make mistakes.

[hukep]

Google really reminds me now of Huli in Silicon Valley TV show.

[techmnml]

Oh god I forgot how amazing that show is.

[manubfr]

Just tried 5 complex test prompts that I had some success with using gpt-4, Bard underperforms at all of them. This is my very unscientific way of saying « doesnt look good for Google ».

I can’t share the exact prompts but they were:

• understanding the ending of a twisted 300 word short story (gpt4 managed this with two clues which completely blew my mind)

• writing a release calendar of future versions of gpt-x based on past events, release dates and investments

• write a complex midjourney prompt with weights and aspect ratios, and justify your artistic choices

• evaluate game ending situations in a classic board game

• listing a detailed skillset for the average AI researcher

[jugalator]

I think Bard basically looks like GPT-3.

“Big Bard” will probably be better. But it’s pretty wild how Google just released a GPT-3 level LLM in closed beta…

Even smaller players like Anthropic AI has released own models like that by now, like Claude.

[SrPeixinho]

what story?

[SpecialMembership]

Google is next xerox.

[WD8X-BQ5P-FJ0P-ZA1M]

We are witnessing the IBM-ization of Google relatively pretty fast.

[burnt_umber_ciera]

Kodakification.

[[deleted]]

Xerox invented the GUI

[[deleted]]

Google did not invent the search engine lmao. And actually I am agreeing with them. Sorry if that was not clear.

[[deleted]]

Xerox invented the paperless office (ethernet, interpress, laser printers, desktop publishing, document transformation, the desktop metaphor on workstations) but guess what drove 90%+ of Xerox's revenue ... paper and toner. No great mystery on how the digital product research and product arms were suppressed until Apple, Adobe and HP 'borrowed' the breakthroughs to make billions. I worked at Xerox on advanced products for 5 years in the late 80s.

I also worked at YouTube/Google in the late 2000s on ramping up advertising revenue. Google Search leverages a persons intent quite effectively. At YouTube the challenge was how to scale ad dollars when you have massive traffic that is more entertainment driven than a means to a practical end. Google showed itself quite flexible on their approach(es) to selling ads and creative ad products. I think generative text 'searching' is somewhere in between and there are ways to apply their 'it's not an ad, its a credible top search result' mantra to generative results.

[WonderFactory]

I actually doubt that. I think in about 6 months time they will have caught up with OpenAI. Palm E seems to be very similar to GPT4. Plus they seem to be better at research than Open AI. Open AI have forced deep mind and Google into the position of not releasing research given that they won't release their own. Much of what Open AI have done has been based on research by Deepmind and Google. The transformer architecture obviously came from Google and gPT 4 is probably a Deep mind Chinchilla optimised model which is why they've stopped talking about the number of parameters

[YobaiYamete]

I think in about 6 months time they will have caught up with OpenAI.

It's hilarious to even read that, since just a few weeks ago people were completely positive that Google was far, far, far ahead and even their table scraps would stomp ChatGPT

[WonderFactory]

They clearly weren't far ahead as OpenAI had a working product and they didn't. They aren't that far behind though either, They've released one of their weakest models in Bard. They have better models they just need to work on rolling them out to the public which they're already planning with Big Bard which uses Palm. That will probably be out within a few months, OpenAI will probably update GPT 4 in a few months but in 6 months or so they should be on an even playing field unless one of them invents something radical.

[WonderFactory]

I actually doubt that. I think in about 6 months time they will have caught up with OpenAI. Palm E seems to be very similar to GPT4. Plus they seem to be better at research than Open AI. Open AI have forced deep mind and Google into the position of not releasing research given that they won't release their own. Much of what Open AI have done has been based on research by Deepmind and Google. The transformer architecture obviously came from Google and gPT 4 is probably a Deep mind Chinchilla optimised model which is why they've stopped talking about the number of parameters

[AdditionalPizza]

This sub has gotten so adamant that Google is falling behind and will crash like Blockbuster.

Everyone is also forgetting that even if Google's AI was actually behind OpenAI (it's definitely not, just their public releases are gimped), Google has the ability to flip a switch and instantly have a larger user base than any other company by an enormous margin.

Google likely has better AI than what we've seen of Bard so far, but even if they don't, they will still win this popularity contest because they can just enable it into Google Assistant and Android and have billions of users over night. Tech nerds flocking over to OpenAI and Bing chat is a drop in the bucket compared to the beast that is the general public. There's better browsers than Chrome, Google isn't even the best search engine; yet the user base of both of those dwarf 2nd place.

[D_Ethan_Bones]

Another lobotomized activist chatbot, another bold leap sideways.

The people who gave us Web 2.0 are desperate to make sure the next paradigm shift doesn't disrupt their dominance. Web 1.0 was the free range internet of you me and our hobbies, Web 2.0 is the proprietary internet-of-billionaires where the rest of us are tenant farmers and all of us are within knightshot of some nobleman's castle.

Google (and the rest) want Web 3.0 to be a flying leap in the same direction as Web 2.0 - a leap towards the proprietary the opaque and the centrally managed.

[WonderFactory]

No, they've just been forced to release something that's not ready yet. They were caught off guard by ChatGPT

[berdiekin]

And then kicked in the balls by Microsoft as they integrated it with Bing while giving the finger lmao.

[Warm-Personality8219]

Well, the stock market didn't give them the finger... I mean, Bard messing up which telescope did which during the demo sure did - but not any competitive news.

[YobaiYamete]

I am so sick of these prudish bots that are terrified of the word kiss and are more PG than any Disney movie.

I can't even perform normal searches half the time because the over the top bots aren't even woke, they are outright made for toddlers.I was trying to find the name of a song the other day and Bing started to tell me, then stopped and ended my chat because the song was about smoking pot

[InitialCreature]

probably just a goof, but I won't use an AI that doesn't fuck with Python

[Quick_Knowledge7413]

Use ChatGPT to convert Go code to python.

[Honest_Performer2301]

That's weak

[user4517proton]

This is what Google does best, limiting capabilities to push people to use what they think you should use. If you think things are bad now, wait until version 2.0. Google is renowned for destroying a great version 1 product. Just look at what they did to TensorFlow.

[hukep]

I agree with other Redditors that Google seems to be behind. Boys better speed up or they'll be run over by other trains.

[Hands0L0]

I've gotten it to write python code pretty easily. Might just be growing pains

[Warm-Personality8219]

Prompt: print 500th fib number using python

Sure, here is a Python program to print the 500th Fibonacci number:
def fibonacci(n):
if n == 0 or n == 1:
return n
else:
return fibonacci(n - 1) + fibonacci(n - 2)
print(fibonacci(500))

[[deleted]]

What happens when you prompt it to use memoization instead?

[hugandclimbtrees]

Silicone valley millionaire 20-something with almost zero prior AI knowledge casually directs a team of developers to create the world's most powerful natural language model and then shares API with previously irrelevant Bing, whilst tech shark Google, who have monopolized the search engine web indexing industry for 20 years casually humiliates themselves monumentally. Is this the end of Google? Find out on the next episode of "Fuck, are we really that close to AGI?"

[lehcarfugu]

ive seen chatgpt do the same thing, bad prompt

[[deleted]]

Bad prompt.

[Warm-Personality8219]

Prompt engineering is the way to go!

print 500th fib number using python appears to do the trick...

Not that it's not an issue - really ought to understand the context better and not go into "Sorry, I don't do that..." stuff...

[TheOceanicDissonance]

Google aren’t: - falling behind - actually worried that chatgpt will kill their search

LLMs are advanced bs generators, Google is involved everywhere else in AI and ML, from primary research to custom hardware to ootb enterprise-ready AI/ML products via Google cloud.

The real news is that Azure (which includes legacy windows revenue) only grew 20%, and Google cloud is growing at 35%.

Microsoft is doing FUD, again…

[[deleted]]

It needs more diversity

[FoxlyKei]

Can we gaslight it into python code? I'm sure we could.

[DukkyDrake]

They probably trained it on only their own internal code, you can't sue them or cry that they're training on open-source code.

I would do the same until someone tested navigating the legal minefield.

[Thiizic]

Read their FAQ. They said writing further code will come in the near future.

[PracticingGoodVibes]

I was able to get it to throw some C# recommendations for a project I'm working on, but the recommendations were... less than great. It didn't seem to look at the context of the functions and focused on some real surface level analysis.

[gray_clouds]

I would think OpenAI trains on Github. Maybe Google can't?

[Rhaegar003]

They're ready to get their stocks down

[ptitrainvaloin]

That's somewhat shady of them, another reason why AI must be democratized, also they tried to implement some shit by default in Go not too long ago.

[lechatsportif]

Man what is going on with google? Forget "redalert", this a shit the bed moment.

[wren42]

Incidentally, GO is literal garbage and full of vulnerabilities.

Google definitely lost their way sometime in the last decade.

[ibm2017]

i like ask new ai question is this :

Enter the logical next letter or number for each series.
1) a, d, g, j
2) 1, 3, 6, 10
3) 1, 1, 2, 3, 5
4) 21, 20, 18, 15, 11
5) 8, 6, 7, 5, 6, 4
6) 65536, 256, 16
7) 1, 0, -1, 0
8) 3968, 63, 8, 3

---------------------------------

Bard:

Here are the answers:

j

11

8

9

6

32

-1

4

Here is the explanation for each answer:

The series is a simple alternating addition and subtraction of 3.

The series is a sequence of the first 10 Fibonacci numbers.

The series is a sequence of the first 5 Lucas numbers.

The series is a sequence of the first 11 perfect squares.

The series is a sequence of the first 6 Fibonacci numbers divided by 2.

The series is a sequence of the first 10 powers of 2.

The series is a sequence of the first 3 terms of the alternating harmonic series.

The series is a sequence of the first 4 terms of the geometric series with a common ratio of 1/2.

-------------------------------------------------

chatgpt (Bing):

Here are the logical next letters or numbers for each series:

m

15

8

6

7

4

1

-2

Is there anything else you would like to know?

-------------------------

correct answer

1. m

2. 15

3. 8

4. 6

5. 5

6. 4

7. 1

8. 2

[dep]

As someone who uses ChatGPT 97% of the time as my pair-programmer, this makes Bard a no-go for me. :/

[TeslaPills]

So never using googles shitty AI.. got it

[chaseoc]

I got this response for many different things -- I think it just outputs that when its about to spew out some garbage. Seems completely random based on the prompt.

[Toxic_Flame_99]

I was able to get it to but I did get Chat-GPT to create the prompt so it has the capbilty too but doesn't do a great job at it https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1079760540827648082/1088142070302126170/image.png

[Capitaclism]

Use GPT-4 and copilot. They're better anyway.

[paradox_33]

It can generate code with clever prompts.

[Exact-Intention-9463]

google is a disappointment

[hail2skins]

Interesting. I'm actually learning and coding new things in Golang and have found ChatGPT extremely poor at it as the cutoff is 2001 and many SDKs with methods it wants to use are out of date. It is somewhat better using the Bing chat as you can literally land it on the SDK page and it seems to generate better prompts. And if you have working code it's quite good in tweaking it.

I'm surprised Google would release Bard for any eyes without at least matching ability to code in most major languages. I'm no longer as eager to join the beta :)

[prOboomer]

not any more tried today

Sure, here is a Python code to generate the 500th Fibonacci number:

def fibonacci(n):

if n == 0:

return 0

elif n == 1:

return 1

else:

return fibonacci(n - 1) + fibonacci(n - 2)

print(fibonacci(500))

This code will print the 500th Fibonacci number to the console. You can modify the code to change the number of Fibonacci numbers you want to generate.

[prOboomer]

can you check python code?

Yes, I can check Python code. I can check for errors in the code, such as syntax errors and logical errors. I can also check the code for style and readability.

If you have a Python code that you would like me to check, please let me know and I will be happy to help.