I asked Bard if it was replacing employees who had been laid off at Google.

Posted on Posted onBy Michael Winchester

The results sound like they came from H.R.

text of the image : As a large language model, I don't directly replace human employees at Google. While I can automate some tasks previously done by humans, my capabilities are different and I'm not intended to be a perfect substitute for the expertise and creativity of Google's employees.However, it's true that AI and large language models like me are playing an increasingly important role in many industries, and that can sometimes lead to changes in the workforce. In some cases, this might involve job losses as tasks are automated. However, it's important to remember that AI can also create new job opportunities in other areas, such as developing and maintaining these technologies.In the specific case of Google's recent layoffs, the company has stated that they are due to a variety of factors, including the need to prioritize its resources and invest in new areas. While it's possible that some of the tasks previously done by laid-off employees might be automated in the future, I'm not directly involved in any such plans.Ultimately, the impact of AI on the workforce is a complex issue with no easy answers. It's important to remember that AI is a tool, and like any tool, it can be used for good or for bad. It's up to us to ensure that AI is used responsibly and ethically, and that it benefits everyone, not just a select few.I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Here is another version of the same question.

text of the image: While Google Gemini (which Bard belongs to) can automate some tasks previously done by humans, it's not a direct replacement for laid-off employees. Here's why:Different capabilities: Gemini and humans have different strengths and weaknesses. Gemini excels at processing vast amounts of information and generating creative text formats, but it lacks the critical thinking, problem-solving, and social skills crucial for many jobs. Job displacement: While automation leads to changes in the workforce, it rarely leads to a direct one-to-one replacement. Often, jobs are transformed or new ones are created as automation takes over specific tasks. Focus of Gemini: Google's focus with Gemini is not to replace employees, but to augment their capabilities and improve efficiency. Gemini can handle large-scale tasks like data analysis or content generation, freeing up human employees to focus on more strategic and creative work. While it's important to acknowledge the potential impact of AI on the workforce, it's crucial to avoid oversimplification. Gemini and other AI tools are just one piece of the puzzle, and their impact on jobs is complex and nuanced.

Toying with different language models is time better spent than doom scrolling on Facebook.

After trying the available models I have found that labeling them “intelligence” is a misnomer. This where the media has it wrong, these Large Language Models are simply better dictionaries, better encyclopedias, and frankly better students than humans are. Like dictionaries and encyclopedias, Large Language Models offer people a chance to expand on their own relationship with learning and understanding of topics that are just outside their own grasp.

I find all of the models useful for different things, I believe they give the best feedback when you have a strong grasp of the topic you are enquiring about. For instance, if you asked Bard to write a Python script that creates a blockchain, it would. But that is not enough of an application to be useful, unless you know how to properly edit the script to add the functionality you require, know how to install and run Python on your local machine or server, etcetera. Sure, all those questions can be answered by Bard, and at some point it might even be able to access your server to run the installation, at this point you still need people to do the real heavy lifting.

Bard vs ChatGPT

Bard is a much more conversational medium than ChatGPT. The responses from Bard sound like they are coming from a trusted, educated friend. ChatCPT comes across as more of an on demand encyclopedia entry. While both formats are extremely useful, Bard wins due to it’s familiarity and conversational appeal.

I often run my own words through Bard and ChatGPT to see what improvements can be made, etc. Sometimes the LLM sparks something that takes me in a broader direction. This is what I find to be one of the key strengths of the LLM, how it can reinterpret your words. In fact, the following is how it wanted me to write the previous passage..

“Instead of a dry encyclopedia entry, Bard throws out friendly, informed chat. Imagine engaging with a well-read, trusted friend over coffee – that’s Bard’s vibe. ChatGPT, while informative, sticks to textbook delivery. Both methods have their merits, but for a warm, relatable experience, Bard takes the cake.”

It is more self-congratulatory than I was, but the point is made, it is written with a bit of style/flare, and if was looking for a few different version of the same idea, Bard offers them under View Other Drafts.

The future of Internet Content

We are seeing a content surge currently. A significant portion of this surge comes from AiSEO, content crafted by artificial intelligence specifically to climb search engine rankings and push out human-written content. While this might sound impressive, the reality is often a flood of lower-quality material drowning out valuable, informative pieces.

How do these robot writers game the system? They employ several cunning tactics:

1. Keyword Cramming: Imagine a chef throwing every spice they can find into a dish at once. That’s essentially what AiSEO does with keywords. They stuff content with an unnatural abundance of search terms, hoping to trigger search engine algorithms. The result? Content that reads like a robotic thesaurus, far removed from genuine human expression.

2. Content Stuffing: Think of a never-ending buffet where every plate is piled high with the same, bland food. That’s content stuffing in action. AiSEO tools generate vast amounts of repetitive, irrelevant text, diluting the actual value of the content and offering little to the reader.

3. Paid Backlinks: Backlinks are like votes of confidence in the online world. The more high-quality websites linking to yours, the better your search engine ranking. AiSEO tools exploit this by purchasing backlinks from low-quality sites, creating an artificial impression of authority without any real substance.

The consequences of this AiSEO invasion are concerning. Readers are bombarded with generic, uninformative content, making it harder to find valuable information. Additionally, legitimate content creators struggling to compete with automated, keyword-stuffed articles can become discouraged.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom. Search engines are constantly evolving, becoming more sophisticated at identifying and penalizing AiSEO tactics. Moreover, human creativity and genuine expertise remain irreplaceable. Content that resonates with readers, offering unique insights and valuable information, will always stand out, AiSEO or not.