3 ms·
Logically it just doesn't have that data and why would it? If you had proprietary data you didn't want to share why would you add it to the language model?
by michaelmrose 3y ago
Logically it just doesn't have that data and why would it? If you had proprietary data you didn't want to share why would you add it to the language model?
- onion2k 3y agoBard is written by developers, and developers often don't have any problem using any data available to them for a purpose they deem 'useful', especially if there's a bonus or a promotion at stake.
- aiunboxed 3y agoI think a company like Google would be having a lot of restrictions around where to train models and where to not. And they already have access to the whole internet, Gmail conversations would be one tiny part of it. Also wonder if they got to actually train on github data (considering the Microsoft angle)
- onion2k 3y agoAlso wonder if they got to actually train on github data Considering all the Github data is on Google BigQuery, probably: https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/public-datasets/github-on-bigquery-analyze-all-the-open-source-code https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/public-datasets/github-...
- PeterStuer 3y agoIn my experience this is not true. Developers were on average more sticklers for "the rules" and very often overinterpreted restrictions beyond what compliance professionals deemed nescessary.
- yreg 3y agoDevelopers don't make the decisions at Google.
- fragmede 3y agoNot anymore, that is. See also: .zip domain
- aiunboxed 3y agoAgree, I doubt it would be trained. If something personal - like Gmail/ drive goes out in any of bard responses, it will be the end of bard.