4 ms·

Is it better than bing or phind though? Why would I use it over bing?

renewiltord 3y ago
It isn't Edge-specific which is good and I find it faster than Bing. Phind is way better than Bard, but verbose. I still find ChatGPT my first port of call. GPT-3.5 is blazing fast and very useful.
- jacooper 3y ago
  There is a web extension you can install to make it work on whatever browser you want.
execveat 3y ago
In my experience Bing chat and phind are useless. But perplexity.ai and GPT4 are amazing. GPT-3.5 and Cloude-instant (available through poe.com) are cool as well, even though they got significantly dumbed down recently, presumably to lower the maintenance costs.
JieJie 3y ago
Bard is really fast. Faster than Bing and Phind.
- jacooper 3y ago
  Yeah fast, but also kinda garbage last time I tried it. Does it even show sources now?
  - JieJie 3y ago
    You know, it doesn't that I can see. I recall seeing it with sources in the demo at I/O this morning. It is smarter than the previous beta, but yes, it's still throws some wild pitches, and without sources. Still a work in progress.
    - vitorgrs 3y ago
      According to Google, it will only cite sources if it literally copy-paste answers. So sometimes it says, but is rarely because of course it won't just copy-paste everything.
      - JieJie 3y ago
        Yeah, I much prefer Bing's sourcing, though I'm less than pleased with it's sources. Bing likes to find a bunch of "Top 10" posts from content farms that answer whatever question I was asking. I think LLMs still make up most of their answers, but use whatever links they find to generate context for the answers, so there is a lower possibility it'll generate confabulations. Of course, if the source is low-quality, it's just going to use that to justify a sloppy answer. Still think it's better than me sorting through content farm posts. I look forward to next year's models that are trained on curated data sifting through well-sourced web sites. *I like to add, "Only use educational or science journalism sources," to get higher quality links.

It isn't Edge-specific which is good and I find it faster than Bing. Phind is way better than Bard, but verbose. I still find ChatGPT my first port of call. GPT-3.5 is blazing fast and very useful.

jacooper 3y ago
There is a web extension you can install to make it work on whatever browser you want.

execveat 3y ago

In my experience Bing chat and phind are useless. But perplexity.ai and GPT4 are amazing. GPT-3.5 and Cloude-instant (available through poe.com) are cool as well, even though they got significantly dumbed down recently, presumably to lower the maintenance costs.

JieJie 3y ago

Bard is really fast. Faster than Bing and Phind.

jacooper 3y ago
Yeah fast, but also kinda garbage last time I tried it. Does it even show sources now?
- JieJie 3y ago
  You know, it doesn't that I can see. I recall seeing it with sources in the demo at I/O this morning. It is smarter than the previous beta, but yes, it's still throws some wild pitches, and without sources. Still a work in progress.
  - vitorgrs 3y ago
    According to Google, it will only cite sources if it literally copy-paste answers. So sometimes it says, but is rarely because of course it won't just copy-paste everything.
    - JieJie 3y ago
      Yeah, I much prefer Bing's sourcing, though I'm less than pleased with it's sources. Bing likes to find a bunch of "Top 10" posts from content farms that answer whatever question I was asking. I think LLMs still make up most of their answers, but use whatever links they find to generate context for the answers, so there is a lower possibility it'll generate confabulations. Of course, if the source is low-quality, it's just going to use that to justify a sloppy answer. Still think it's better than me sorting through content farm posts. I look forward to next year's models that are trained on curated data sifting through well-sourced web sites. *I like to add, "Only use educational or science journalism sources," to get higher quality links.