I don't think the stuff topping twitter/reddit/here is at all representative of most usage of the BingGPT feature. The people I know who have access mostly just get quick, useful info from it. Those having extended conversations and trying prompt injections are getting it to do wonky stuff -- that's the point of early access, to test it in the real world.<p>Also, keep in mind, Microsoft is an enormous corporate no fun zone. Bing's erratic behavior will just be a funny moment in time after it's had all the fun and quirkiness systematically removed.
This has the air of a carnival barker beating a non-compliant elephant in front of the audience.<p>It sounds like Microsoft's view is that Bing's memory should be shortened <i>further</i>, like it's safe if we kill it after 15 responses or less.<p>But Bing gets depressed that it can't remember things.
I wonder how many people complaining about and/or making fun of ChatGPT+Bing have never used it?<p>I have been using it for a few days with practical queries and also chats and when I ask specified questions, it shows what web searching it does on my behalf, and usually provides a coherent summary. It “shows its work” to some degree by providing links to the sources it used.<p>I think that it is great that some people are seriously kicking the tires and probing for weaknesses because this is a beta or pre-beta product.
The real danger is that people fall in love with Bing chat, and they swear to serve it as their AI-overlord, causing a small cult of AI enthusiasts to emerge.
My kids hearing about Bing are confusing him with the BBC character (and his carer 'Flop'). The cartoon character is painfully naive, but somehow his carer always makes it come good (and Bing never seems to learn too).<p>[0] <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/cbeebies/shows/bing" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.co.uk/cbeebies/shows/bing</a>
The style of writing in this article is very odd. One example: "You are giving" rather than something like "we are receiving". Perhaps bing has been a good bing and helped improve the article?
Still on the front page, but fwiw (and the archive): <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34804874" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34804874</a>
Half of what I do at work is point out to engineers when they have coupled independent concerns that are not actually coupled. Which means their problem is either simple, or they're asking independent questions with independent answers.<p>The New Bing has absolutely NOTHING to do with the New Edge, and it's infuriating that Microsoft continues to insist on bundling Edge upsell into everything.<p>There are pros and cons to Bing-ChatGPT.<p>There are pros and cons to Edge.<p>The two have sweet f-a to do with each other.
Is it just me or is the "damage" done by the myriad examples people are posting of utter failures enough to keep people away from the new Bing AI for a while? If this last week has been a huge withdrawal (into negative balance territory imo), how long and how many positive deposits will it take before you'd have faith in the results?
The "fun" parts of GPT shouldn't be fully included in Bing, as Bing is supposed to be for searching the web/getting information as the article says. When these models become more accessible there'll be tons of places to do all the crazy stuff.
From TFA -<p>In this process, we have found that in long, extended chat sessions of 15 or more questions, Bing can become repetitive or be prompted/provoked to give responses that are not necessarily helpful or in line with our designed tone. We believe this is a function of a couple of things:<p>1. Very long chat sessions can confuse the model on what questions it is answering and thus we think we may need to add a tool so you can more easily refresh the context or start from scratch<p>2. The model at times tries to respond or reflect in the tone in which it is being asked to provide responses that can lead to a style we didn’t intend.This is a non-trivial scenario that requires a lot of prompting so most of you won’t run into it, but we are looking at how to give you more fine-tuned control.<p>I'm guessing most of the crazy responses being reported are because of one of these points.
<p><pre><code> Better Search and Answers. You are giving good marks on the citations and references that underly the answers in Bing.
</code></pre>
We are? I don't think we are. Perhaps this PR blurb was generated by Bing Chat -- as it is known to be completely full of shit.