8 ms·

For someone already invested in the Google suite of products (gmail, docs, etc), this sounds pretty useful. Also, this part seems especially interesting: > St

For someone already invested in the Google suite of products (gmail, docs, etc), this sounds pretty useful. Also, this part seems especially interesting: > Starting today with responses in English, you can use Bard’s “Google it” button to more easily double-check its answers. When you click on the “G” icon, Bard will read the response and evaluate whether there is content across the web to substantiate it. When a statement can be evaluated, you can click the highlighted phrases and learn more about supporting or contradicting information found by Search. The biggest problem with all LLMs at the moment is the frequency at which they are wrong (at least when they are used like an internet search to lookup factual info). Any LLM that can improve this (or as in Bard's case, make it easier to detect wrong info) is likely to gain traction.

freedomben 3y ago
Bard is especially bad right now, at least compared to gpt4. Once they move to Gemini it will be interesting to compare, but until then things like "when does the new Staind album come out" have to be answered the old way with Google search and reading.
- jvolkman 3y ago
  I just asked it your question and it seemed to give the correct answer? Also, there's now a built-in button to check its answer against an actual Google search and the UX is pretty slick.
  - freedomben 3y ago
    Did it say September 15 or 18? (both answers I've gotten from it over the past month or two). If so, that's wrong. It's September 22. As sibling pointed out though, there are apparently web pages that have it wrong so it's probably not Bard's fault. I also wouldn't be shocked if the date changed and was originally 9/15
    - BXlnt2EachOther 3y ago
      It does look like the release date was pushed back a week, about a month ago. https://web.archive.org/web/20230000000000*/https://staind.lnk.to/COTF https://web.archive.org/web/20230000000000*/https://staind.l... https://www.theprp.com/2023/08/22/news/staind-premiere-their-latest-single-in-this-condition/ https://www.theprp.com/2023/08/22/news/staind-premiere-their... (August 23) >Citing production delays, Staind have now announced that their new album “Confessions Of The Fallen” will arrive a week later than intended. That full-length outing will now be available on September 22nd.
      - freedomben 3y ago
        Fascinating! Thanks that solves what was a pretty big mystery to me, and definitely makes me feel better about Bard
- xnx 3y ago
  This is what Bard told me: "Staind's new album, Confessions of the Fallen, was released on September 15, 2023." If that's wrong, it's because I also see web pages that have it wrong.
  - freedomben 3y ago
    Yep it's wrong, it's coming out on September 22. I don't doubt that some web pages have it wrong though, and it's hard to fault Bard for that.
    - vel0city 3y ago
      Yeah, hard to blame Bard for getting that wrong when there's tons of webpages that seem semi-legit that have September 15th. Searching confessions of the fallen "September 15" 2023 yields hundreds of thousands of results which at least for a cached version has that date. https://allmusicmagazine.com/staind-release-new-single-in-this-condition-from-their-first-album-in-12-years-out-sept-15/ https://allmusicmagazine.com/staind-release-new-single-in-th... Comparatively, ChatGPT says "I'm sorry, but I do not have access to real-time information, and my knowledge only goes up until September 2021. To find out the release date of a new Staind album, I recommend checking the official Staind website, social media profiles, or reputable music news sources for the most up-to-date information." So which is more useful, one that doesn't even know there is a new album coming out, or one that knows what was its release date as of just a couple of months ago?
      - trop 3y ago
        > So which is more useful, one that doesn't even know there is a new album coming out, or one that knows what was its release date as of just a couple of months ago? To semi-misquote Lewis Carroll: Which is better, a stopped clock or a clock which loses a minute a day? Carroll posits the former, as it is precisely correct twice a day. The trick, of course, is knowing for sure when those two times per day will be.
- eminence32 3y ago
  I'm sure others will feel differently (and I'm very eager to hear from others with different views), but for me there's not that much difference in usefulness between a model that's wrong 5% of the time and one that's wrong 25% of the time. Both models require manual validation 100% of the time.
  - BoxFour 3y ago
    I certainly feel different. A 5% error rate, to me, is akin to branch prediction, where I occasionally need to rollback but it's infrequent enough that it doesn't pose a significant issue. However, when it reaches 25%, I find myself meticulously verifying everything beforehand.
    - eminence32 3y ago
      Do you feel confident in your ability to detect when the LLM is wrong? For me personally, I don't have the confidence to do this , which is why I feel like I need to verify everything, even in the 5% case.
      - freedomben 3y ago
        For me it comes down to "how important is it to be right"? For many of the queries, it's not that important and if I lose the 5% gamble, it's annoying but ultimately inconsequencial. If it's an important thing to be right about, then I will verify it from both.
        delecti 3y ago
        I don't know how else to ask this: how are you so okay with disregarding accuracy? What questions are you asking where you don't care if the answer is wrong? I guess I just fundamentally don't understand what the point is. Why not just bookmark the "random article" link on Wikipedia if it doesn't matter anyway?
        3y ago
hdidvdksj 3y ago
[dead]
candiddevmike 3y ago
So we can validate Bard using blogspam SEO articles, eventually having those written by Bard or ChatGPT? It's a LLM ouroboros
- vitiral 3y ago
  * the snake eating it's own tail This feedback loop, when you extend LLM to the horizon, is my primary point against this approach. When 90% of the new training data is from content (a worse version of) it previously generated you get a negative feedback loop to zero quality.

freedomben 3y ago

Bard is especially bad right now, at least compared to gpt4. Once they move to Gemini it will be interesting to compare, but until then things like "when does the new Staind album come out" have to be answered the old way with Google search and reading.

jvolkman 3y ago
I just asked it your question and it seemed to give the correct answer? Also, there's now a built-in button to check its answer against an actual Google search and the UX is pretty slick.
- freedomben 3y ago
  Did it say September 15 or 18? (both answers I've gotten from it over the past month or two). If so, that's wrong. It's September 22. As sibling pointed out though, there are apparently web pages that have it wrong so it's probably not Bard's fault. I also wouldn't be shocked if the date changed and was originally 9/15
  - BXlnt2EachOther 3y ago
    It does look like the release date was pushed back a week, about a month ago. https://web.archive.org/web/20230000000000*/https://staind.lnk.to/COTF https://web.archive.org/web/20230000000000*/https://staind.l... https://www.theprp.com/2023/08/22/news/staind-premiere-their-latest-single-in-this-condition/ https://www.theprp.com/2023/08/22/news/staind-premiere-their... (August 23) >Citing production delays, Staind have now announced that their new album “Confessions Of The Fallen” will arrive a week later than intended. That full-length outing will now be available on September 22nd.
    - freedomben 3y ago
      Fascinating! Thanks that solves what was a pretty big mystery to me, and definitely makes me feel better about Bard
xnx 3y ago
This is what Bard told me: "Staind's new album, Confessions of the Fallen, was released on September 15, 2023." If that's wrong, it's because I also see web pages that have it wrong.
- freedomben 3y ago
  Yep it's wrong, it's coming out on September 22. I don't doubt that some web pages have it wrong though, and it's hard to fault Bard for that.
  - vel0city 3y ago
    Yeah, hard to blame Bard for getting that wrong when there's tons of webpages that seem semi-legit that have September 15th. Searching confessions of the fallen "September 15" 2023 yields hundreds of thousands of results which at least for a cached version has that date. https://allmusicmagazine.com/staind-release-new-single-in-this-condition-from-their-first-album-in-12-years-out-sept-15/ https://allmusicmagazine.com/staind-release-new-single-in-th... Comparatively, ChatGPT says "I'm sorry, but I do not have access to real-time information, and my knowledge only goes up until September 2021. To find out the release date of a new Staind album, I recommend checking the official Staind website, social media profiles, or reputable music news sources for the most up-to-date information." So which is more useful, one that doesn't even know there is a new album coming out, or one that knows what was its release date as of just a couple of months ago?
    - trop 3y ago
      > So which is more useful, one that doesn't even know there is a new album coming out, or one that knows what was its release date as of just a couple of months ago? To semi-misquote Lewis Carroll: Which is better, a stopped clock or a clock which loses a minute a day? Carroll posits the former, as it is precisely correct twice a day. The trick, of course, is knowing for sure when those two times per day will be.
eminence32 3y ago
I'm sure others will feel differently (and I'm very eager to hear from others with different views), but for me there's not that much difference in usefulness between a model that's wrong 5% of the time and one that's wrong 25% of the time. Both models require manual validation 100% of the time.
- BoxFour 3y ago
  I certainly feel different. A 5% error rate, to me, is akin to branch prediction, where I occasionally need to rollback but it's infrequent enough that it doesn't pose a significant issue. However, when it reaches 25%, I find myself meticulously verifying everything beforehand.
  - eminence32 3y ago
    Do you feel confident in your ability to detect when the LLM is wrong? For me personally, I don't have the confidence to do this , which is why I feel like I need to verify everything, even in the 5% case.
    - freedomben 3y ago
      For me it comes down to "how important is it to be right"? For many of the queries, it's not that important and if I lose the 5% gamble, it's annoying but ultimately inconsequencial. If it's an important thing to be right about, then I will verify it from both.
      - delecti 3y ago
        I don't know how else to ask this: how are you so okay with disregarding accuracy? What questions are you asking where you don't care if the answer is wrong? I guess I just fundamentally don't understand what the point is. Why not just bookmark the "random article" link on Wikipedia if it doesn't matter anyway?
        3y ago

hdidvdksj 3y ago

[dead]

candiddevmike 3y ago

So we can validate Bard using blogspam SEO articles, eventually having those written by Bard or ChatGPT? It's a LLM ouroboros

vitiral 3y ago
* the snake eating it's own tail This feedback loop, when you extend LLM to the horizon, is my primary point against this approach. When 90% of the new training data is from content (a worse version of) it previously generated you get a negative feedback loop to zero quality.