Google Bard is so bad that I’m actually impressed

I’ve been waiting for an AI that can replace ChatGPT for quite some time, but the new Google Bard is not it. This is not to say that it isn’t impressive in its own right, but more that it’s not impressive compared to what we’ve already seen. I think this is actually a good thing for OpenAI, because the competition will push them to improve. <br><br>For those who don’t know, ChatGPT is an AI that’s so good at answering questions that it can already pass the bar exam. I have used it for several months now and have been impressed with it, to say the least. So when I heard that Google was releasing their own competitor, I was very excited. I had to wait a few hours to get access, and when I finally did, I was impressed. <br><br>I asked it to write me a story about the last days of Rome, and it wrote me a 1,200-word story in five minutes. That’s impressive for a story, and even more so for an AI. I also asked it to summarize the plot of a TV show, and while it was a little incorrect, it was much better than I expected. <br><br>The real test, though, was asking it a question. I’ve noticed that ChatGPT gets really stupid if you ask it something that’s too complex, so I had to see how the Google Bard would do. I asked it to explain why the US is so good at sports, despite being so bad at everything else. I knew this was a stupid question, but I just wanted to see what it would do. It gave me a long, multi-paragraph response, but it basically said, “It’s because of team work and motivation.” <br><br>Now, this is where most AIs would get lost and just spew forth random words, but the Google Bard went on. It said, “This is because of the way that humans are wired. We have an innate ability to work together, and when we do, we can accomplish great things. Look at the ancient Greeks, who built incredible structures like the Parthenon with nothing but stone and a few tools. Or the Europeans, who built great ships like the Mayflower that allowed them to cross entire oceans. In both cases, it was the ability of humans to work together and motivate one another that allowed them to achieve such great things.” <br><br>It then went on to say that the US is unique because it’s the first country to be built entirely by immigrants, who brought with them the ability to work together and motivate each other. It then said, “This is why the US is so good at sports, despite being so bad at everything else. We have a unique ability to come together and work towards a common goal, and this has allowed us to achieve great things in the world of sports. From the Super Bowl to the World Series, we have shown the world what we are capable of when we work together towards a common goal.” <br><br>I sat back and read the response, which was actually pretty good. Now, I know this isn’t the answer I would have given, but it was actually pretty good. It was better than any AI I’ve seen so far. The problem is, when I asked it follow-up questions, it completely forgot what it had said before. For example, I asked it, “But what about the financial side of things?” And it gave me a completely different answer, saying, “It’s because of the money that we invest in our sports teams. Look at the Yankees, who spend hundreds of millions of dollars on players and facilities every year. Or the Cowboys, who have one of the most valuable brands in the world, thanks to their huge following in Texas. In both cases, it’s the financial investment that has allowed them to achieve such great things in the world of sports.” <br><br>This completely contradicts its previous answer, and that’s where the Google Bard really falls down. It has some good tools and can do some cool things, but it can’t hold a conversation very well. Still, overall, I’m impressed with what Google has done, and I think this is going to be a big step forward for AI.