Can someone in the know explain how Bard could be as bad as it is, considering Google has been investing in AI for as long as they have? I thought they were earlier than most to begin serious work on AI? How could Bard suck this bad?
1. The Innovator's Dilemma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma)
This is the premise that a mature incumbent will usually fail to respond fast enough to disruptive innovations by an upstart because their organization is optimized to continue providing existing customers sustaining improvements to the products they are already paying for.
2. The Coordination Headwind (https://komoroske.com/slime-mold/)
This is the premise that cross-functional coordination difficulty grows superlinearly as the organization scales.
The relative influence of these phenomena is a matter of debate. And, there may be other factors at play.
But, the mix of needing to respond (against organizational incentives) to a disruptive innovation while also trying to align long-established factions, product teams and PAs - many with a motivation to have an outsized influence over the new effort - within the organization presents a Herculean challenge.
In BigCo you have ego that blocks authentic artistic critique. There are traditions. There are rules. We learned our lesson last time.
In the best organizations, artistic critique is a time-honored tradition passed down from the elders to the padwans. Young Jedi learn how to navigate the matrix with the blessings of their ancestors.
Unfortunately, hacking culture in a big org is outré. What made Apple special was that Steve Jobs created many hidden micro cultures within his asylum that allowed so many unorthodox experiments, some of them even worked out.
Maybe you have some other examples of people who have been able to hold a core business and build the next iteration many many times successfully? They’re rare birds.
Edit: for clarity, Google could have a killerAI product in a year if they would kill their ego. Demis Hassibis (I think that’s how you spell his name, sorry) the CEO @ DeepMind can absolutely build the thing they want, but they’d have to give him carte Blanche, and they won’t.
Bard is almost always better.
For example try: "why does my hole saw have a spring over the drill bit?"
Bard is correct, chatGPT makes up nonsense. (There's no such thing as "pilot bit extension spring", and the rest of the reply makes little sense as well.)
https://chat.openai.com/share/485a6968-6379-4f64-87b3-6c1575...
As an example I asked both how many groups there are of order 6. Bard gave the correct answer of 2 and listed what they were. ChatGPT said there were five and proceeded to list seven.
> Q:
> How many groups are there of order 6?
> A:
> There are two groups of order 6.
> To determine this, we consider the possible structures of a group of order 6. Since 6 = 2 × 3, where both 2 and 3 are prime numbers, the groups of order 6 can either be cyclic or a direct product of smaller cyclic groups.
> Cyclic Group of Order 6: There is always one cyclic group for any given order. The cyclic group of order 6 is denoted as 𝐶₆ or ℤ₆, which is generated by an element of order 6.
> Non-Cyclic Group: The other possibility is a non-cyclic group. By Sylow's theorems, the number of elements of order 2 must divide 3 and be congruent to 1 modulo 2, and the number of elements of order 3 must divide 2 and be congruent to 1 modulo 3. This means there must be one Sylow 2-subgroup and one Sylow 3-subgroup. The non-cyclic group of order 6 is the symmetric group 𝑆₃, which is the group of all permutations of three objects. It is non-abelian and can also be thought of as the semi-direct product of 𝐶₂ and 𝐶₃.
> So, there are two groups of order 6: the cyclic group ℤ₆ and the symmetric group 𝑆₃.
They are worse than GPT-4 because nobody other than OpenAI (and their free Azure credits) have been willing to throw $100 million in training a single LLM.
I think most large companies have the same problem and the only solution is to literally test different teams with how they handle specific case studies. It would require alot of careful planning and studying but it would be the only way to resolve such problems. An alternative would be to have an anonymous feedback that is constantly pushed onto customers and constantly checked and mined for insight. if was a major company I would hire myself or someone who had my experiences to do this. But I’m already retired/funemployed lol. Sorry for the rant.