Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Amazingawesomator t1_j60dpx3 wrote

Bing is the bullet headed for Bing. They done played themselves.

0

steepleton t1_j60e5wu wrote

Yeah you say that, but a search engine that understands a long question without jumping in and giving you results for the least important word in the sentence would be awesome

22

arkezxa t1_j60j1ba wrote

I'd be more open to using Bing if it didn't have such a stupid name. They should start there!

2

TheFriendlyArtificer t1_j60wa5d wrote

Bing's primary purpose is porn. ChatGPT has aggressive filters on sexual content.

I'll be curious to see who wins.

7

RM641A t1_j61dj76 wrote

Probably not, but Bing still brought in a revenue of $8.53 billion from search advertising in the 2021 fiscal year.

6

[deleted] t1_j61zlch wrote

Bing is often better than Google

4

quantumfucker t1_j62vu3y wrote

Replying to steepleton (#1,513,670)

An AI that was capable of verifying anything it knows and providing sources would also be awesome. Until it can do that (it can’t since it relies on statistical processes and stupid amounts of training and resources), search engines will remain superior.

1

E_Snap t1_j650ns8 wrote

Replying to quantumfucker (#1,524,502)

Given the pace at which the field of AI is moving, even by the week, that is a useless point to make. Chances are your complaints have already been solved and the paper is just waiting to be published.

−2

quantumfucker t1_j66t46q wrote

Replying to E_Snap (#1,534,738)

Just because we can land on the moon doesn’t mean we can land on the sun. Fact-checking requires deductively analyzing a set of propositions. The way this AI currently works is inference based on probability. That’s not the kind of gap you can bridge in a couple weeks.

2

quantumfucker t1_j679eqy wrote

Replying to E_Snap (#1,545,393)

That you can’t assume everything is possible just because some impressive things have happened. These breakthroughs didn’t come out of nowhere, they’re based in very sound and rigorous theories. You have provided none as to how or why a language model would be able to logically verify what it produces. You’re just vaguely gesturing at the fact breakthroughs exist.

0