Since Bart is now available in Europe I have both options now and problem of choice :) People who have access to both for a while, what AI tool do you mostly use?

  • monerobull@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Haven’t tried bard but use ChatGPT to write/debug scripts and SAP stuff. Also asking it when I have simple but technical questions.

    I am also downloading and running the latest models in the local LLM space every 2-3 weeks, just waiting for the point at which they finally take over gpt3.5 at which point I’ll probably not touch ChatGPT again.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I still don’t think it’s much more of a novelty. From what I’ve used it really feels like you can see the training data in all of the answers, which obviously, but like if I ask it to write a cover letter it feels like it’s some cover letter it trained on more than mine

      • snowe@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s much better than novelty if you learn how to use it. I routinely use it to write scripts for Google apps scripts, bash, etc. I’m using it to help with rust libraries that don’t have much documentation. I’ve used it to research camera gear that I don’t know much about. And once you get some information from it you can then go Google. Google has gotten so bad lately that it’s not hard for ChatGPT to beat it though. If you’re using 3.5 I highly recommend stopping that nonsense though. There’s zero reason to use 3.5 and every reason to use 4.

  • noodlejetski@geddit.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    none, because 1. privacy nightmare, and 2. a glorified keyboard autocorrect isn’t a replacement for a search engine.

    • gelberhut@lemdro.idOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Both have option to turn off history saving. In this case they keep dialog for a short time only.

      Regarding glorified keyboard autocorrect… I see this a bit different.

      Anyways, thanks for sharing your opinion.

      • noodlejetski@geddit.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Both have option to turn off history saving. In this case they keep dialog for a short time only.

        I’m sure this will prevent Google/Bing from storing everything you type in there on their end for as long as they please.

        I see this a bit different.

        given how the very purpose of LLMs is to just create sequences of words that are statistically likely to follow each other in a sentence, and how there are countless examples out there of them hallucinating answers including non-existent court cases, or providing authors of articles with a list of articles they have not written and so on, I struggle to see it as anything else.

        • gelberhut@lemdro.idOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I already got that you do not found a use case - and this is fine. I asked for opinion of people who use these both tool and can compare

    • John_Coomsumer@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a bit close minded and reductive when you can see a large number is examples where these tools beat the shit out of search engines, and search engines have been on a precipitous decline in quality for years now. Not talking shit; the privacy concerns are very valid and i dont think there is anything at all wrong with an anti-ai stance in these areas, I just don’t want novices reading this and thinking these tools are “glorified keyboard autocorrect” when some near version of them is undoubtedly the future of both internet search and internet assistant.

      • Teppic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not sure I fully agree. These tool are really ruddy brilliant at certain things (like writing or translating computer code, drafting certain documents) but they are poor at being factually correct. Unless / until they find a way to fact-check themselves I don’t see them replacing search, just complementing it.

    • ollien@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ditto. I mostly use it when Google (search, not Bard) fails me. I find it’s really good at answering questions of the ilk: “I swear there’s a function for this in the library I’m using, what’s it called again?”, or telling me that it doesn’t actually exist.

      • eldrichhydralisk@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agreed. I find Bing chat is really good when I know almost nothing about what I’m searching, or when I know a whole lot about what I’m searching. Like in your example, if I know exactly what I need but can’t remember its name Bing will read all the spammy beginners’ guides for me and get the answer. And on the opposite end, if I’m looking to buy a gift in a hobby I don’t remotely understand Bing does a pretty good job of holding my hand through the search process.

        Weirdly, medium knowledge questions seem to still do better as a basic Google search. If I need to fix an appliance I’ve fixed before, but it’s been a long time so I really need a full walkthrough, the first few results on Google are faster than waiting for Bing to talk through it.

    • AlternateRoute@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Having it do a search then summarize the content from the search in one step is really handy. Basically skips the step of regular search oping a bunch of the links looking for relevant info.

      AND it provides the source / references so you can easily click and read the actual page the info came from.

  • sandayle@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I tried both with same question and found them both good. I’m not actively using them for now, but if they give the same results I’ll prioritize Bard. I hate Microsoft more than Google.

  • toshmonaut@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I haven’t tried Bard, but I’ve currently been using ChatGPT for writing cover letters for job applications.

  • sincle354@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    NovelAI for paid usage with NSFW capabilty! It’s not to be used in a conversational mode. Instead, you write a section of the story and it will intelligently fill in. It’s quite expensive but it also includes an AI image generation feature as well for anime artstyles (and furry…).

  • Granixo@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I use ChatGPT and Bing Chat.

    I barely use Bard because it does not support Spanish yet (my main language).

  • Newtra@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I still use Google for ~95% of my queries because I like real sources, comprehensive documentation, and not having to read a wall of text when a one-line answer would have sufficed.

    ChatGPT is a good replacement for Quora/Stack Exchange for explaining general knowledge stuff like other languages’ grammar and simple science, as well as finding authors/books/movies from descriptions when you’ve forgotten their names.

    Bard is… kinda dumb. I gave it a few chances, but it was nothing compared to ChatGPT’s free tier.