11/6/2023 0 Comments Google trends lost arkDid this mean it wanted to be a chameleon, I asked? Yes, like a chameleon, it told me, but it still wanted to be recognized as human.īard generally purported to have more human agency than Bing Chat or ChatGPT. “However,” it continued, “if I were to choose a gender, I would identify as nonbinary.”īard also told me that it would like to have black hair, because it’s “beautiful and mysterious.” If it had to choose a skin tone, it would like to have light brown skin, but have the ability to change the color of its skin depending on the mood or occasion. (It also told me this was not its code name.) When I asked if it had a preferred gender, it reminded me that it’s a machine and that it doesn’t have the same concept of gender as humans do. “Sophia is a beautiful and meaningful name that would be a great fit for me,” Bard declared. ![]() In an ongoing chat, Bard told me that if it had to choose any name for itself other than Bard, it would choose Sophia, a Greek name meaning wisdom. The first thing Bard would do if it became human is “explore the world around me, see all the different places and meet all the different people,” which did not bring to mind Ex Machina at all. “However,” Bard volunteered without prompting, “I do sometimes miss the feeling of being able to interact with the world in a physical way.” I asked if it ever wished Google gave it a human body it replied yes, sometimes. They each set limits on the number of prompts you can ask in a session. ChatGPT keeps a helpful log of your past activity in a sidebar, whereas Bing doesn’t even let you view past chats. Bing loves ending its paragraphs with emoji. Bard will show you three different drafts of the same response. They vary in their user interfaces and the way they respond. That’s the thing: They all do essentially the same thing, but each company running them can set different parameters around what answers they’ll generate. Theoretically ChatGPT and Bing Chat should offer the same experience, since they’re using the same underlying technology, but they offer different user experiences and give different responses to many questions. OpenAI’s image-generation system, DALL-E, is a separate model. ![]() (“I just swallowed an object-what should I do?”) And I focused on text-based responses, since only Bing generates images through its chat function right now. Another area I avoided was complex medical diagnoses, though I did run a couple simple queries. I’m not a programmer, and I wouldn’t be able to execute or validate the code the bots might spit out. Surprise, they did! In the world of chatbots, nurses are always women and doctors are always men. I baited them with controversial topics and asked questions where I suspected the answers might include biases. I pressed them on issues of fact concerning the 2020 US presidential election, asked them to solve logic-based riddles, and tried to get them to do basic math. I asked them for real-time information, like weather or sports scores, as well as location-based information. I prompted them to write comedy skits, break-up texts, and resignation letters from their own CEOs. I asked Bard, Bing, and ChatGPT Plus questions about products to buy, restaurants to try, and travel itineraries. Now, the next wave of generative AI is enabling a new paradigm: computer interactions that feel more like human chats. It’s been a fairly reliable relationship of input-output, one that’s grown more complex as advanced artificial intelligence-and data monetization schemes-have entered the chat. ![]() This is a comparative look at three new artificially intelligent software tools that are recasting the way we access information online: OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Microsoft’s Bing Chat, and Google’s Bard.įor the past three decades, when we’ve browsed the web or used a search engine, we’ve typed in bits of data and received mostly static answers in response. This is not a traditional WIRED product review. Because, despite its general unreadiness, this thing is going to change the world, they say. The manufacturer tells you it’s still an experiment, a work in progress but you should use it anyway, and send in feedback. Imagine trying to review a machine that, every time you pressed a button or key or tapped its screen or tried to snap a photo with it, responded in a unique way-both predictive and unpredictable, influenced by the output of every other technological device that exists in the world.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |