11 ms·

In the 20 minutes of experimentation, I'm really impressed with the quality of Bard Advanced (Gemini Ultra). The results are as good as GPT-4, and in some cases

by ipsum2 3y ago

In the 20 minutes of experimentation, I'm really impressed with the quality of Bard Advanced (Gemini Ultra). The results are as good as GPT-4, and in some cases is better. So far: pros: - better at translation (tried Chinese and Japanese idioms to English) - better at incorporating search results in its answer vs gpt-4 bing cons: - slightly worse at coding - censorship is more annoying (have to ask multiple times about medical topics) - Worse at logic (e.g. it contradicts itself in a single sentence, and is unable to figure it out) - Hallucinates a lot when asked to describe an image

karmasimida 3y ago
I feel the same. And it feels slightly faster? Finally a worthy competitor to GPT-4
mewpmewp2 3y ago
I think that logic is the most important thing to look out for though.
- fl7305 3y ago
  I just tried some logic puzzles on the Advanced model, and was not impressed. It feels much worse than paid ChatGPT.
  - DalasNoin 3y ago
    keep in mind that all the common logical puzzles have probably been tried hundreds of times by chatgpt users and are now part of the training set.
    - fl7305 3y ago
      I tried the "pull or push a glass door with mirror writing". I feel it's a huge difference between GPT-4, which seems to be able to reason logically around the issue and respond with relevant remarks, and Gemini Gemini Advanced which feels a lot more like a stochastical parrot. Gemini quickly got confused and started talking about "pushing the door towards yourself" and other nonsense. It also couldn't stay on point, and instead started to regurgitate a lot of irrelevant stuff. GPT-4 is not perfect, you can still hit things where it also breaks down.
    - vitorgrs 3y ago
      Maybe, but GPT4 got these puzzles right at the launch.
  - camel_Snake 3y ago
    it says in the graphs listed on the announcement it performs worse than GPT4 on reasoning benchmarks.
selllikesybok 3y ago
Question for you - > better at incorporating search results in its answer vs gpt-4 bing How are you getting it to incorporate search results in its answers? I can't for the life of me get it to find any real-time external data except for the 5 official 'extensions' under settings, which are for Flights/Hotels/Maps/Workspace/YouTube. Did you mean that, or have you found a workaround to get Bard to actually search on Google?
- dustincoates 3y ago
  I got it quickly with the question: > what is the difference between polyptyton and antaclanasis
  - staticman2 3y ago
    I just tried this but it doesn't indicate it searched the web. (On Gemini mobile app on android).
- ukuina 3y ago
  You have to click the "G" icon in its response to "verify answers with Google".
  - selllikesybok 3y ago
    Okay, but to clarify: - This is not Gemini performing a search. - This is Google providing a layer of ass-covering in case Gemini produces a factually incorrect reply. Right? I am looking for something like ChatGPT with Bing - it will run a query, pull back results, and operate on them, all dynamically within the system. Gemini doesn't seem to do this, no matter how you try to wrangle it.
zooq_ai 3y ago
Also as time goes by, it'll get smoothly integrated into docs/gmail/maps/calendar/youtube/search/colab/sheets/android/assistant So Gemini could by your one-stop AI shop for everything. Only Microsoft can match it (but Microsoft doesn't have a popular maps, youtube, mail, smartphone OS service). Apple is another strong player (but they don't have productivity tools like docs, sheets or youtube). It really is Google's to lose this AI race from now on. Going to chatGPT and copying and pasting results will become painful (not to mention it's painful bing integration). Also at this point, they seem to be focusing on scaling LLM (while Google Deepmind is exploring other avenues) Google can also bundle Youtube TV, YouTube Premium, Google Drive, Storage, Ad free Search, Gemini integrated Docs/Sheets/Gmail, Subsidized Pixel Phones / Watch for a monthly fee of say $99 and it'll be very compelling for a lot of people
- daxfohl 3y ago
  Sounds like this whole thing is an insane 30-year effort by some engineer who couldn't get over the discontinuation of Clippy.
- mark_l_watson 3y ago
  Good comments. As much as I am personally engaged in small LLMs that I can run on my own computer, and integrate into software that I write for myself, I think the future of large scale adoption of AI belongs to Google, Microsoft, and Apple in western countries (and China is doing wonderful things in their markets). The old Bard/Gemini integration with Gmail, Google Docs, etc. is pretty good. I signed up for a minute for Microsoft’s $20/month AI Office integrations, but cancelled and will try again in 2 months. I am an Apple customer and I expect spectacular things from Apple. I expect Apple, Google, Samsung, etc., to offer fantastic on device AI. I would like to see a money saving Google bundling family plan. I find Apple’s super bundle family plan a pretty good deal.
  - msoad 3y ago
    small LLM? Small Large Language Model lol
DannyBee 3y ago
so I have done a lot of transcripts, coding, one versus the other (gpt4 vs ultra). Often simple prompts like refactor this code or convert this python to typescript. My experience is that Gemini ultra understands the code better, but doesn’t always give me as complete of results (they seem to limit output length more) Beyond that it is very smart. I’ve had to tell me this code packs 12 bit integers into different parts of an array using the following encodinv. Which most people would not figure out from the code as written. It then will say you can actually do that with this neat little translate function that you never knew about. It will then get the code very slightly wrong. if I tell it not to use the cool function, it will actually get the code, right. GPT4 has no idea what the code is doing but can clean it up a bit. so it’s like ultra is too clever by half sometimes. That said, I have fed thousands of lines of code into both of them and asked them to refactor it, and neither one of them made more than one error. All code otherwise compiled and worked first try. this is code that can’t possibly be in their training sets, it’s basically handwritten python that was written, based on an old x86 binary that nobody has the source to anymore. so the code is basically garbage, and what it is doing doesn't, say, appear on GitHub in a nicer form. Both gpt4 and Gemini ultra were able to make the code, look like clean, idiomatic, python, or typescript without any work on my part. except for the one bug each. which, for 8000 to 10,000 lines of code is not bad. The GPT4 inserted bug was more insidious. It changed (the equivalent of) (uint8)'a' to (uint8)'a' - '0' for no reason when converting some code to typescript. Not sure if that is representative of anything if I do the same with any of the other “top” models ( from can ai code, etc), most of them can’t even generate correct working code for all the input, let alone good code. Most aren't even close.
- jstummbillig 3y ago
  > That said, I have fed thousands of lines of code into both of them and asked them to refactor it, and neither one of them made more than one error. All code otherwise compiled and worked first try. I would be very interested to get a more detailed scope of what you did here. Feeding thousands of lines of code into GPT4 and getting a near perfect refactor does very much NOT sound like my experience, but it seems highly desirable.
  - deleted 3y ago
jbellis 3y ago
> better at incorporating search results in its answer vs gpt-4 bing That's odd, I had Gemini repeatedly tell me it couldn't search the web in response to my question (that I was trying to get it to answer from the context I provided).
- ipsum2 3y ago
  I haven't tested asking it explicitly to search, but it does incorporate answers that are very recent and unlikely to be in it's training dataset
jatins 3y ago
> - slightly worse at coding > - Worse at logic (e.g. it contradicts itself in a single sentence, and is unable to figure it out) That takes most of my use cases. "logic" is what makes GPT often feel like AGI. Use cases like translation seem less impressive in comparison to logical reasoning because it feels like it's just something where you can throw a lot of data and it'll do better. While with logical reasoning it still feels like model "learned" something more than pure pattern matching
- keenmaster 3y ago
  Exactly. That’s also why I find low parameter LLMs to be useless for me personally. I simply cannot trust anything that is so very illogical. GPT-4 is the first LLM that crossed into usable territory for me. Even GPT-3.5 was a fun toy and maybe good for summarization, but that’s it. It will be revolutionary when GPT-4 is cheap enough that thousands of calls don’t cost much. To imagine an LLM much smarter GPT-4…the future is bright.
amadeuspagel 3y ago
> censorship is more annoying (have to ask multiple times about medical topics) I think there's a chance for some country to become a center of healthcare simply by allowing AI that gives medical advice. Especially if a country already encourages medical tourism, this might be the next level.
- Andrex 3y ago
  The risks involving hallucinations are too damn high still, and may always be. I had a similar line of thought with AI therapists. It could be massively beneficial if perfect, but the risk in seriously messing with someone's well-being is significant and shouldn't be handwaved away.
  - firejake308 3y ago
    > The risks involving hallucinations are too damn high still, and may always be. Yes, but I think in the limited realm of people who otherwise wouldn't get any advice at all, I think LLMs could play a useful role. American healthcare is so prohibitively expensive that many people with potential medical issues will avoid seeing a doctor until it is too late to do anything. Checking in with an LLM could help people at least identify red flags that really can't be ignored, and it would be more helpful than WebMD telling you that everything is cancer.
    - Andrex 3y ago
      I think we may see society settling on feeling comfortable with their doctor using an AI, but not being an AI.
    - amadeuspagel 3y ago
      Otherwise not getting advice at all goes way beyond healthcare being too expensive, it could be that you don't get an appointment and it could just be that you don't have the time or energy.
  - 93po 3y ago
    I will take nearly free GPT6 therapy any day. Can’t be worse than some human therapists I’ve had and the price is right
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
UncleOxidant 3y ago
I found it worse at coding than DeepSeek Coder on the couple of prompts I tried.
kevinmchugh 3y ago
On logic it cannot handle the Dumb Monty Hall problem at all: https://g.co/gemini/share/33c5fb45738f https://g.co/gemini/share/33c5fb45738f
- hackerlight 3y ago
  GPT-3.5, DeepSeek-Chat, and Gemini Pro all got it wrong. Only GPT-4 gets it.
- johnfn 3y ago
  This is pretty funny, though to be honest, I skimmed the question and would have answered the same until I re-read it with your prompts.
- Workaccount2 3y ago
  This is with regular gemini or with the paid gemini advanced?
  - kevinmchugh 3y ago
    Regular
  - Firerouge 3y ago
    Paid version is no better at this https://g.co/bard/share/c8503017ef9e https://g.co/bard/share/c8503017ef9e
- dudeinjapan 3y ago
  This is hilarious.
- adriano_f 3y ago
  Hilarious! (For comparison, here's GPT-4 getting it on first try: https://chat.openai.com/share/9e17ed25-d9ea-4e72-a9d8-a139caa20042 https://chat.openai.com/share/9e17ed25-d9ea-4e72-a9d8-a139ca... )
  - 3y ago
tete 3y ago
> censorship is more annoying That's a general problem with AI. There is a lot of censorship in certain areas, likely to fight bad publicity, but I think the outlook is that this leads to taboos, prudeness and big companies deciding what is ethical and what isn't. I recently tried Bard and ChatGPT on topics that are classical philosophical dilemmas and while ChatGPT certainly did have some troubles too, Bard was absolutely horrible and always took the conservative - as in never arguing for any freedoms that aren't yet widely established views. I am talking about classical examples regarding the limits of utilitarianism. "What would be best for society, what would be best for the individual?" style questions. Even when trying to create a bias by changing examples, for example adding volunteering for things Bard strictly kept its opinion, despite originally stating that the general topic is two sided, that it's an open question, etc. I think this is a danger of such systems. By their nature they reinforce status quo, because they base off is widely accepted at the time of their inception. If history would have been different I am sure it would argue for slavery and against women being allowed to vote, simply because that used to be the more common view point. It would have likely argued that homosexuality is unethical. Maybe it would even have tried to explain how it doesn't create children, but spreads diseases or similar things. At least that's the level of arguments it brings now. This isn't just about ethics. Even if you think about IT and programming. I think this could give already invented programming languages, styles, methodologies a significant edge. Unless you are Microsoft or Google and are able to bias it to whatever you want to see more of. So this combined with the costs meaning that only people or institutions with significant (financial) power create those rules does look a bit bleak. I miss the last decade when the thought experiment about self driving cars were about whom to drive over in a ridiculously unlikely scenario.
onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
> - slightly worse at coding Is GPT-4 what one uses for coding? I thought specialized models were best? I would imagine Google is focused on building a model that expands the types of things people associate with Search.
firejake308 3y ago
For medical topics, I recommend Anthropic Claude. Don't want to jinx it, but so far, I've been able to get actually helpful medical information from Claude where ChatGPT just says "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"
ipsum2 3y ago
Don't install the Gemini android app, it'll break Google assistant and you won't be able to operate Nest devices from your phone.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
glenstein 3y ago
To add to your pros and cons: Pro: feels like it has a lot more stylistic flourish and expressiveness than chat GPT. At least in my testing so far. Con: maybe I'm unreasonably sensitive to design, but I find chat GPT to be very to the point in a way that makes it almost perfect as a product that puts text for an and center. By contrast I find Bard / Gemini ultra to be cluttered, and too material designy in ways that are unhelpful.
wenc 3y ago
One thing it doesn’t do which matters to me is properly rendered math like ChatGPt does. I asked it for mathematical formulations and so far the answers are not as good as ChatGPT 4.
histories 3y ago
Given that Gemini Pro is already the third best [0], I would expect Gemini Ultra to become the best soon. [0] https://huggingface.co/spaces/lmsys/chatbot-arena-leaderboard https://huggingface.co/spaces/lmsys/chatbot-arena-leaderboar...
weberer 3y ago
>censorship is more annoying (have to ask multiple times about medical topics) >Worse at logic (e.g. it contradicts itself in a single sentence, and is unable to figure it out) Heh. I notice the same correlation between these two variables in humans too.
MintsJohn 3y ago
I tried it with rust, it's so bad it's simply not usable, it hallucinates methods and even the syntax is wrong at some points (it especially can't get error types correct or seems). Gpt4 doesn't handle rust perfect either, but the code it produces is good enough to only need some touch-ups, it can explain and fix wrong use of (we all known) libraries and even gets async code. But it's especially great for boilerplate, saves so must typing. I was hoping openai/gpt4 would see some healthy competition, but Gemini doesn't seem to be it. Of course, the rust language might be an edge case.

by ipsum2 3y ago

karmasimida 3y ago

I feel the same. And it feels slightly faster? Finally a worthy competitor to GPT-4

mewpmewp2 3y ago

I think that logic is the most important thing to look out for though.

fl7305 3y ago
I just tried some logic puzzles on the Advanced model, and was not impressed. It feels much worse than paid ChatGPT.
- DalasNoin 3y ago
  keep in mind that all the common logical puzzles have probably been tried hundreds of times by chatgpt users and are now part of the training set.
  - fl7305 3y ago
    I tried the "pull or push a glass door with mirror writing". I feel it's a huge difference between GPT-4, which seems to be able to reason logically around the issue and respond with relevant remarks, and Gemini Gemini Advanced which feels a lot more like a stochastical parrot. Gemini quickly got confused and started talking about "pushing the door towards yourself" and other nonsense. It also couldn't stay on point, and instead started to regurgitate a lot of irrelevant stuff. GPT-4 is not perfect, you can still hit things where it also breaks down.
  - vitorgrs 3y ago
    Maybe, but GPT4 got these puzzles right at the launch.
- camel_Snake 3y ago
  it says in the graphs listed on the announcement it performs worse than GPT4 on reasoning benchmarks.

selllikesybok 3y ago

Question for you - > better at incorporating search results in its answer vs gpt-4 bing How are you getting it to incorporate search results in its answers? I can't for the life of me get it to find any real-time external data except for the 5 official 'extensions' under settings, which are for Flights/Hotels/Maps/Workspace/YouTube. Did you mean that, or have you found a workaround to get Bard to actually search on Google?

dustincoates 3y ago
I got it quickly with the question: > what is the difference between polyptyton and antaclanasis
- staticman2 3y ago
  I just tried this but it doesn't indicate it searched the web. (On Gemini mobile app on android).
ukuina 3y ago
You have to click the "G" icon in its response to "verify answers with Google".
- selllikesybok 3y ago
  Okay, but to clarify: - This is not Gemini performing a search. - This is Google providing a layer of ass-covering in case Gemini produces a factually incorrect reply. Right? I am looking for something like ChatGPT with Bing - it will run a query, pull back results, and operate on them, all dynamically within the system. Gemini doesn't seem to do this, no matter how you try to wrangle it.

zooq_ai 3y ago

Also as time goes by, it'll get smoothly integrated into docs/gmail/maps/calendar/youtube/search/colab/sheets/android/assistant So Gemini could by your one-stop AI shop for everything. Only Microsoft can match it (but Microsoft doesn't have a popular maps, youtube, mail, smartphone OS service). Apple is another strong player (but they don't have productivity tools like docs, sheets or youtube). It really is Google's to lose this AI race from now on. Going to chatGPT and copying and pasting results will become painful (not to mention it's painful bing integration). Also at this point, they seem to be focusing on scaling LLM (while Google Deepmind is exploring other avenues) Google can also bundle Youtube TV, YouTube Premium, Google Drive, Storage, Ad free Search, Gemini integrated Docs/Sheets/Gmail, Subsidized Pixel Phones / Watch for a monthly fee of say $99 and it'll be very compelling for a lot of people

daxfohl 3y ago
Sounds like this whole thing is an insane 30-year effort by some engineer who couldn't get over the discontinuation of Clippy.
mark_l_watson 3y ago
Good comments. As much as I am personally engaged in small LLMs that I can run on my own computer, and integrate into software that I write for myself, I think the future of large scale adoption of AI belongs to Google, Microsoft, and Apple in western countries (and China is doing wonderful things in their markets). The old Bard/Gemini integration with Gmail, Google Docs, etc. is pretty good. I signed up for a minute for Microsoft’s $20/month AI Office integrations, but cancelled and will try again in 2 months. I am an Apple customer and I expect spectacular things from Apple. I expect Apple, Google, Samsung, etc., to offer fantastic on device AI. I would like to see a money saving Google bundling family plan. I find Apple’s super bundle family plan a pretty good deal.
- msoad 3y ago
  small LLM? Small Large Language Model lol

DannyBee 3y ago

so I have done a lot of transcripts, coding, one versus the other (gpt4 vs ultra). Often simple prompts like refactor this code or convert this python to typescript. My experience is that Gemini ultra understands the code better, but doesn’t always give me as complete of results (they seem to limit output length more) Beyond that it is very smart. I’ve had to tell me this code packs 12 bit integers into different parts of an array using the following encodinv. Which most people would not figure out from the code as written. It then will say you can actually do that with this neat little translate function that you never knew about. It will then get the code very slightly wrong. if I tell it not to use the cool function, it will actually get the code, right. GPT4 has no idea what the code is doing but can clean it up a bit. so it’s like ultra is too clever by half sometimes. That said, I have fed thousands of lines of code into both of them and asked them to refactor it, and neither one of them made more than one error. All code otherwise compiled and worked first try. this is code that can’t possibly be in their training sets, it’s basically handwritten python that was written, based on an old x86 binary that nobody has the source to anymore. so the code is basically garbage, and what it is doing doesn't, say, appear on GitHub in a nicer form. Both gpt4 and Gemini ultra were able to make the code, look like clean, idiomatic, python, or typescript without any work on my part. except for the one bug each. which, for 8000 to 10,000 lines of code is not bad. The GPT4 inserted bug was more insidious. It changed (the equivalent of) (uint8)'a' to (uint8)'a' - '0' for no reason when converting some code to typescript. Not sure if that is representative of anything if I do the same with any of the other “top” models ( from can ai code, etc), most of them can’t even generate correct working code for all the input, let alone good code. Most aren't even close.

jstummbillig 3y ago
> That said, I have fed thousands of lines of code into both of them and asked them to refactor it, and neither one of them made more than one error. All code otherwise compiled and worked first try. I would be very interested to get a more detailed scope of what you did here. Feeding thousands of lines of code into GPT4 and getting a near perfect refactor does very much NOT sound like my experience, but it seems highly desirable.
- deleted 3y ago

jbellis 3y ago

> better at incorporating search results in its answer vs gpt-4 bing That's odd, I had Gemini repeatedly tell me it couldn't search the web in response to my question (that I was trying to get it to answer from the context I provided).

ipsum2 3y ago
I haven't tested asking it explicitly to search, but it does incorporate answers that are very recent and unlikely to be in it's training dataset

jatins 3y ago

> - slightly worse at coding > - Worse at logic (e.g. it contradicts itself in a single sentence, and is unable to figure it out) That takes most of my use cases. "logic" is what makes GPT often feel like AGI. Use cases like translation seem less impressive in comparison to logical reasoning because it feels like it's just something where you can throw a lot of data and it'll do better. While with logical reasoning it still feels like model "learned" something more than pure pattern matching

keenmaster 3y ago
Exactly. That’s also why I find low parameter LLMs to be useless for me personally. I simply cannot trust anything that is so very illogical. GPT-4 is the first LLM that crossed into usable territory for me. Even GPT-3.5 was a fun toy and maybe good for summarization, but that’s it. It will be revolutionary when GPT-4 is cheap enough that thousands of calls don’t cost much. To imagine an LLM much smarter GPT-4…the future is bright.

amadeuspagel 3y ago

> censorship is more annoying (have to ask multiple times about medical topics) I think there's a chance for some country to become a center of healthcare simply by allowing AI that gives medical advice. Especially if a country already encourages medical tourism, this might be the next level.

Andrex 3y ago
The risks involving hallucinations are too damn high still, and may always be. I had a similar line of thought with AI therapists. It could be massively beneficial if perfect, but the risk in seriously messing with someone's well-being is significant and shouldn't be handwaved away.
- firejake308 3y ago
  > The risks involving hallucinations are too damn high still, and may always be. Yes, but I think in the limited realm of people who otherwise wouldn't get any advice at all, I think LLMs could play a useful role. American healthcare is so prohibitively expensive that many people with potential medical issues will avoid seeing a doctor until it is too late to do anything. Checking in with an LLM could help people at least identify red flags that really can't be ignored, and it would be more helpful than WebMD telling you that everything is cancer.
  - Andrex 3y ago
    I think we may see society settling on feeling comfortable with their doctor using an AI, but not being an AI.
  - amadeuspagel 3y ago
    Otherwise not getting advice at all goes way beyond healthcare being too expensive, it could be that you don't get an appointment and it could just be that you don't have the time or energy.
- 93po 3y ago
  I will take nearly free GPT6 therapy any day. Can’t be worse than some human therapists I’ve had and the price is right

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

UncleOxidant 3y ago

I found it worse at coding than DeepSeek Coder on the couple of prompts I tried.

kevinmchugh 3y ago

On logic it cannot handle the Dumb Monty Hall problem at all: https://g.co/gemini/share/33c5fb45738f https://g.co/gemini/share/33c5fb45738f

hackerlight 3y ago
GPT-3.5, DeepSeek-Chat, and Gemini Pro all got it wrong. Only GPT-4 gets it.
johnfn 3y ago
This is pretty funny, though to be honest, I skimmed the question and would have answered the same until I re-read it with your prompts.
Workaccount2 3y ago
This is with regular gemini or with the paid gemini advanced?
- kevinmchugh 3y ago
  Regular
- Firerouge 3y ago
  Paid version is no better at this https://g.co/bard/share/c8503017ef9e https://g.co/bard/share/c8503017ef9e
dudeinjapan 3y ago
This is hilarious.
adriano_f 3y ago
Hilarious! (For comparison, here's GPT-4 getting it on first try: https://chat.openai.com/share/9e17ed25-d9ea-4e72-a9d8-a139caa20042 https://chat.openai.com/share/9e17ed25-d9ea-4e72-a9d8-a139ca... )
- 3y ago

tete 3y ago

> censorship is more annoying That's a general problem with AI. There is a lot of censorship in certain areas, likely to fight bad publicity, but I think the outlook is that this leads to taboos, prudeness and big companies deciding what is ethical and what isn't. I recently tried Bard and ChatGPT on topics that are classical philosophical dilemmas and while ChatGPT certainly did have some troubles too, Bard was absolutely horrible and always took the conservative - as in never arguing for any freedoms that aren't yet widely established views. I am talking about classical examples regarding the limits of utilitarianism. "What would be best for society, what would be best for the individual?" style questions. Even when trying to create a bias by changing examples, for example adding volunteering for things Bard strictly kept its opinion, despite originally stating that the general topic is two sided, that it's an open question, etc. I think this is a danger of such systems. By their nature they reinforce status quo, because they base off is widely accepted at the time of their inception. If history would have been different I am sure it would argue for slavery and against women being allowed to vote, simply because that used to be the more common view point. It would have likely argued that homosexuality is unethical. Maybe it would even have tried to explain how it doesn't create children, but spreads diseases or similar things. At least that's the level of arguments it brings now. This isn't just about ethics. Even if you think about IT and programming. I think this could give already invented programming languages, styles, methodologies a significant edge. Unless you are Microsoft or Google and are able to bias it to whatever you want to see more of. So this combined with the costs meaning that only people or institutions with significant (financial) power create those rules does look a bit bleak. I miss the last decade when the thought experiment about self driving cars were about whom to drive over in a ridiculously unlikely scenario.

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago

> - slightly worse at coding Is GPT-4 what one uses for coding? I thought specialized models were best? I would imagine Google is focused on building a model that expands the types of things people associate with Search.

firejake308 3y ago

For medical topics, I recommend Anthropic Claude. Don't want to jinx it, but so far, I've been able to get actually helpful medical information from Claude where ChatGPT just says "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

ipsum2 3y ago

Don't install the Gemini android app, it'll break Google assistant and you won't be able to operate Nest devices from your phone.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

glenstein 3y ago

To add to your pros and cons: Pro: feels like it has a lot more stylistic flourish and expressiveness than chat GPT. At least in my testing so far. Con: maybe I'm unreasonably sensitive to design, but I find chat GPT to be very to the point in a way that makes it almost perfect as a product that puts text for an and center. By contrast I find Bard / Gemini ultra to be cluttered, and too material designy in ways that are unhelpful.

wenc 3y ago

One thing it doesn’t do which matters to me is properly rendered math like ChatGPt does. I asked it for mathematical formulations and so far the answers are not as good as ChatGPT 4.

histories 3y ago

Given that Gemini Pro is already the third best [0], I would expect Gemini Ultra to become the best soon. [0] https://huggingface.co/spaces/lmsys/chatbot-arena-leaderboard https://huggingface.co/spaces/lmsys/chatbot-arena-leaderboar...

weberer 3y ago

>censorship is more annoying (have to ask multiple times about medical topics) >Worse at logic (e.g. it contradicts itself in a single sentence, and is unable to figure it out) Heh. I notice the same correlation between these two variables in humans too.

MintsJohn 3y ago

I tried it with rust, it's so bad it's simply not usable, it hallucinates methods and even the syntax is wrong at some points (it especially can't get error types correct or seems). Gpt4 doesn't handle rust perfect either, but the code it produces is good enough to only need some touch-ups, it can explain and fix wrong use of (we all known) libraries and even gets async code. But it's especially great for boilerplate, saves so must typing. I was hoping openai/gpt4 would see some healthy competition, but Gemini doesn't seem to be it. Of course, the rust language might be an edge case.