If you require additional reasons to approach generative AI with caution, look no further than a recent BBC interview featuring Debbie Weinstein, Vice President of Google UK. In the interview, she suggests using Google Search to fact-check content generated by the Bard AI.
Weinstein emphasizes that Bard should be viewed as an “experiment” more suitable for “collaboration around problem solving” and “creating new ideas”. It appears that Google did not originally intend for the AI to serve as a resource for “specific information”. In addition to fact-checking Bard’s content, Weinstein recommends providing feedback through the thumbs-up and thumbs-down buttons at the bottom of the generated text in order to improve the chatbot. The BBC highlights that Bard’s homepage acknowledges its limitations and the possibility of inaccuracies, but it does not explicitly mention Weinstein’s advice to verify results using Google Search.
Debbie Weinstein offers some valid advice. Generative AIs face significant challenges in producing accurate information. They often generate false information in response to prompts, which raises concerns. Two New York lawyers encountered this problem when they used ChatGPT and presented “fictitious legal research” cited by the AI.
It is prudent to verify the information provided by Bard. However, coming from a vice president of the company, these remarks are somewhat disconcerting.
Analysis: So, what’s the point?
The reality is that Bard is essentially an advanced search engine. Its primary function is to serve as “a launchpad for curiosity” and provide factual information. The main distinction between Bard and Google Search lies in Bard’s conversational nature and its ability to offer crucial context. Whether Google acknowledges it or not, people will inevitably use Bard to look up information.
What makes Weinstein’s comments particularly puzzling is that they contradict Google’s plans for Bard. At I/O 2023, we witnessed the various ways in which the AI model could enhance Google Search, from providing comprehensive results on different topics to creating personalized fitness plans. Both of these applications require accurate information. Is Weinstein implying that this update is pointless because it utilizes Google’s AI technology?
While it is only one individual from Google expressing this viewpoint (so far), it is worth noting that she holds a vice president position. If the chatbot is not intended for critical information, then why is it being incorporated into the search engine to further enhance its capabilities? Why deploy something that is seemingly unreliable?
This statement raises concerns, and we hope that it does not reflect the broader stance of the company. Generative AI is undoubtedly here to stay, and it is crucial that we have confidence in its ability to provide accurate information. We have reached out to the tech giant for comment, and this story will be updated in the near future.
Denial of responsibility! TechCodex is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
Alex Smith is a writer and editor with over 10 years of experience. He has written extensively on a variety of topics, including technology, business, and personal finance. His work has been published in a number of magazines and newspapers, and he is also the author of two books. Alex is passionate about helping people learn and grow, and he believes that writing is a powerful tool for communication and understanding.
