Comments
MrMarriott t1_j8wavws wrote
ChatGPT is literally based on research and work that Google did. Google did the innovative work but OpenAI did a way better job of productizing the work.
https://ai.googleblog.com/2017/08/transformer-novel-neural-network.html
extropia t1_j8x3osi wrote
"Second mouse gets the cheese".
FreezingRobot t1_j8xgytp wrote
Yes, but this all reminds me of the "Xerox invented the GUI" stuff. It's not sure it makes who invents what, it matters who can go to market with it.
Google has been treading water for years, living off stuff they already made and people depend on. When they stop depending on it and/or it gets regulated out of existence, they're screwed.
MrMarriott t1_j8xxxmi wrote
That is a fair analogy, but my comment was in response to the claim Google was trying to catch rather than innovating, which I thought was weird since innovation isn't Google's problem, execution and strategy are.
nu1stunna t1_j8yke0v wrote
I’ve taken chatgpt for a spin and was underwhelmed by the results. It’s possible that I’m not using it “right” but it seems very limited. What you can and can’t ask from it is hardcoded in and it’s really shitty. They are so afraid of being sued, that they won’t allow you to prompt it to criticize religious or government figures, predict sports outcomes, or anything that can be seen as “controversial “. I find that pretty ridiculous. It’s a free AI service, not some expert who is giving advice for money.
SeaweedSorcerer t1_j8yzwdc wrote
I think that’s the point. It’s meant to be a demonstration of their capabilities, basically an advertisement, to entice companies to buy their AI products. It’s not a product in its own. Corporations are pretty much always careful to keep their ads inoffensive. Especially when AI chat bots have a history of being taken down within a matter of days when they go off the rails.
Valiantheart t1_j926jmu wrote
People are bitching about its biases when returning results too. I've not used it myself, but don't find that surprising.
yungplantdad t1_j8xcio0 wrote
Sure, and all of googles search engine revolves around the work of Markhov. They may have done the research, but their product certainly looks less mature.
genericrich t1_j8y1wz7 wrote
Anytime the CEO asks the rank and file to do QA, it is a disaster. QA is a skilled position and randos usually generate more noise than signal. He should know better.
kkbreddit t1_j8y6hv8 wrote
Dogfooding is a common practice at Google for all products and new features. This is is addition to QA, more like pre alpha testing.
Agariculture t1_j8zax6p wrote
Im curious. Why that word for that process?
walkslikeaduck08 t1_j8zbsbm wrote
Doesn’t seem like there’s a clear explanation but
> In 2006, the editor of IEEE Software recounted that in the 1970s television advertisements for Alpo dog food, Lorne Greene pointed out that he fed Alpo to his own dogs. Another possible origin he remembers is from the president of Kal Kan Pet Food, who was said to eat a can of his dog food at shareholders' meetings.
> In 1988, Microsoft manager Paul Maritz sent Brian Valentine, test manager for Microsoft LAN Manager, an email titled "Eating our own Dogfood", challenging him to increase internal usage of the company's product. From there, the usage of the term spread through the company.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food
ElvisPressRelease t1_j95swq5 wrote
I don’t disagree necessarily, but Google didn’t invent search, they perfected it. That’s important to keep in mind when criticizing a company for playing catch-up.
MossytheMagnificent t1_j8wix7j wrote
Totally. I am really surprised they are making such a reaction. They should understand the bell curve. Hype will drop.
Also, I've been in companies where they promote X hours of creative time. Good idea, but without guidance or some sort of cadence, it won't happen. Most employees will spend time on the critical aspects of their job before committing to creative time.
RockAndStone69 t1_j8vyll3 wrote
Sums up everything google does... They don't have any new ideas. Just copy others and they fail because they are always second,... or third ... Or their product repels customers because it sucks seeing same 4 color scheme everywhere... browsing g+ felt like reading emails at work...
garygoblins t1_j8wf46e wrote
Bard (LaMDA) has existed since 2019. It's just not been released publicly...
KSRandom195 t1_j8whytj wrote
And the stuff going on with ChatBingTana is exactly why it hadn’t been released yet.
It doesn’t do what it appears to do, and that’s more dangerous than folks expect.
[deleted] t1_j8x83zp wrote
[deleted]
KommunistischerGeist t1_j8wojt6 wrote
Google is a dangerous, evil company but it's seems like you don't know what they are doing. Google has been leading the ai space since years and is publishing a lot of their work for free for example Tensorflow
Alkyen t1_j8wh8su wrote
So ignorant lol.
RockAndStone69 t1_j8whx2n wrote
Some arguments would be welcome.
Alkyen t1_j8wkii0 wrote
You're the one making the false claim, the onus is on you to provide evidence that none of their technology is innovative. But since you seem the type to just write and not check anything, let me give you some ideas of technologies who became widely accepted as the standard, because they were so much better than the competition:
Google Search - The most widely used search engine in the world that revolutionized the way people find information on the internet. This is why you call it 'googling'
Google Maps - A popular mapping service that provides real-time traffic updates, street view, and directions. It has become an essential tool for navigation.
Google Earth - A virtual globe that allows users to explore the world in 3D, and view maps, satellite imagery, and terrain.
Google Android - An open-source mobile operating system that powers the majority of smartphones and tablets worldwide.
Gmail, Google Drive, Google Translate are also great products who've had many innnovative ideas. People use google translate to travel in countries where they don't speak the language.
I assume you'd say none of those can be deemed innovative? Also I see another commenter has pointed out to you that google literally were part of inventing the technology behind ChatGPT lol
Edit: typos. But why do I even bother, you'd just downvote and move on anyway
DrashkyGolbez t1_j8wpvlx wrote
Android and earth were just bought right?
And calling google translate innovative when translators on web have been since the 2000s
I mean google does innovate, but its not the first line on it
Alkyen t1_j8wqlmk wrote
There were also other searches before google search. Ideas are cheap, execution is what matters and google has been at the forefront of many technological leaps.
Obviously companies buy each other at different stages of development and you can have discussions about who deserves credit for what. But at least in my mind to try and diminish everything google has done in the past 2 decades is ignorant.
RockAndStone69 t1_j8woa5t wrote
Those are older ideas from google's prime when it was really company of innovation. I do not deny relevance of these.
What I am saying is they ran out of new and their own ideas. When there is new trend, google wants to hop in and make just something average and then it dies in 3-5 years.
It's like google is in midlife crysis..
neuroticgooner t1_j8x7vfh wrote
Lol what are you talking about? Chatgpt is literally created out of foundational research coming out of google. Google has also had a functional version of bard used by employees for years. It just wasn’t released to the public until recently
Alkyen t1_j8wph8u wrote
>Sums up everything google does... They don't have any new ideas. Just copy others and they fail because they are always second,..
This is what you said initially which did not include 'Google used to be good in the past but NOW they suck.
You also completely ignore their work on AI past few years?
spoonface46 t1_j8wpvwp wrote
Totally wrong lol but go ahead and spread misinformation based on your unqualified perspective
AReformedHuman t1_j8va7qk wrote
"We need your help to permanently erase your jobs faster"
venustrapsflies t1_j8wwbc4 wrote
No LLM is going to replace the jobs of google engineers.
IAmTaka_VG t1_j8yhkqn wrote
No LLM is going to replace any software developers. All that will happen is Developers get more efficient which means leadership asks for more features in tighter deadlines.
Anyone who thinks management won't just expect more from employee's is foolish.
[deleted] t1_j8y1zat wrote
[removed]
E_Snap t1_j8vur8n wrote
This is a good thing as long as you hold your politicians accountable for permanent wage replacement, like you should already be doing.
AReformedHuman t1_j8xaag4 wrote
Is this a joke? In what world do you live in where the people get genuine say? We can't even properly tax the rich and you think they'll just allow "unearned" wages?
E_Snap t1_j8y4zrv wrote
I live in the world where being defeatist like you are is called being a class traitor.
Personal_Problems_99 t1_j8yh5uf wrote
I think all Google employees should consider this very real fact. They might want to consider... Pacing themselves. Not so slow that get fired for being incompetent but not so fast they get fired fast.
Anyways... The employees are going into the grinder when it's all done.
marcodave t1_j8wa7lo wrote
I read this with Apu's voice
Isacobs_35160_LHM t1_j8vavel wrote
Why doesn't Google ask Deep Mind to help the ChatBot Bard?
-_1_2_3_- t1_j8zr50z wrote
they should bing it
UrbanMuskrat t1_j909z7w wrote
“I want to be alive.” is the LAST thing I want Google to think.
slackinfux t1_j8v7a7j wrote
I hate the term 'dogfood'. Nobody eats their own dogfood. Nobody.
[deleted] t1_j8vlg0l wrote
[deleted]
One-Statistician4885 t1_j8w6776 wrote
Listen, i was three okay.
Nerrs t1_j8wpppj wrote
It seems from a literal dog food company who's own employees would never feed their dogs the product they make because it was so bad.
This then caused them to recognize their inferior product and rally around improving it. It's a pretty important concept in managing a business, what employee performs well if they themselves wouldn't use the product they make.
hesaysitsfine t1_j8xz99k wrote
What does this even mean in this context?
luxmesa t1_j8yvrj0 wrote
It comes from the phrase “eat your own dog food”, which means “use the products you’re selling to customers.” The idea at tech companies is that, if you personally wouldn’t use this product, then customers won’t want to either. So by making your employees use it, they will inevitably figure out which parts of your product have problems and then those problems can get fixed.
BeachFuture t1_j8vglfb wrote
He is so clueless.
ministerbumblewank t1_j8wrdqn wrote
This is what happens when you install a care taker type CEO rather than a true visionary
ramabrahma t1_j8w1ea1 wrote
Bard.. Am I the only one that doesnt like the name?
phroztbyt3 t1_j8wn22i wrote
The AI hated it such much, it changed its own name to Brad.
ramabrahma t1_j8yi4xf wrote
I like Brad better than Bard ngl
mvfsullivan t1_j8xhizs wrote
So ugly and gross
wicklowdave t1_j8vd9lf wrote
I wonder what a conversation between Bard and ChatGPT would look like
often_says_nice t1_j8vt7ds wrote
I know we aren't there yet, but imagine what it would be like if they were sentient. Two artificially sentient beings, similar but created in slightly different ways. I wonder if it would be like a Human speaking to Neandertal for the first time. Both entities are kind of similar but probably structurally and cognitively a bit different.
Agariculture t1_j8zbd54 wrote
Might look like this; only 5 years better
Mikel_S t1_j8wyysh wrote
I've been playing with chatgpt the past few days, giving it obscure scenarios (help me finish my excel vba based custom solitaire variant with a nonstandard deck and ruleset), and generally gathering info on sql, and chatting about memes occasionally.
Its been fun and interesting. I fed it a garbled mess of vba code that accessed an sql database with a dynamically generated query, asked what it did, and it spelt it all out in plain English completely accurate.
At one point it did a line by line breakdown for me and it was fantastic.
I double checked all of its answers, and except in one case, it seems accurate. And the case in which it was "wrong" was actually brought up as a caveat based on choice of sql systems, before I'd even noticed it was "wrong".
Its like having somebody to talk to about this code, and bounce ideas off of. It's how me and the sql guy at work do stuff together, he knows the syntax, I have ideas that seem obvious to me but lack the implementation knowledge, and he can do that part. It's great fun for me, and the tone of the generated text jives really well with my own conversational idiosyncrasies.
ILikeLenexa t1_j8v77no wrote
That's enough time to do nothing.
undersight t1_j8yhwsx wrote
How is this guy still their CEO? Google needs better leadership.
Sudden-Ad-1217 t1_j8wqudr wrote
Google is on a slow decline to irrelevancy that started 2 years ago. This is incredibly fun to watch
JHCNotanotherUserID t1_j8xyc2m wrote
Beginning to smell like desperation!
[deleted] t1_j8wnrwt wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j8wu71w wrote
[removed]
realcul t1_j8yqu2z wrote
Google plus 2.0.. wasn't this the same message they had for Google plus.
ElGuano t1_j8wrs58 wrote
Is this going to be Google's Horizon Worlds?
AHSfav t1_j8xsrh2 wrote
Does this guy have any idea what he's doing
outofobscure t1_j8vx04d wrote
Have you tried asking the bing chatbot for help? Seriously smells a bit desperate…
opknorrsk t1_j8vn3jo wrote
This feels a bit like a panic mode rather than a solid plan. Trying to catch-up with competition rather than innovate won't secure their leadership position on the web.