I guess it's only fair that we may scrape Bard just like Bard scrapes us? I think it's called "disruption" :-)
I went down the cloud console rabbit hole to play with it. Only the bison model was available (of the non-descriptively named gecko, otter, bison, unicorn models). For innocuous prompts I got this error: "The response is blocked because the input or response potentially violates our policies. Try rephrasing the prompt or adjusting the parameter settings. Currently, only English is supported."
Where it did respond, I liked the quality. It was comparable to the GPT-3.5 API. Perhaps a little better even.
But it looks like you have to rent an instance of Vertex AI to use it. It doesn't seem to be pay per use as OpenAIs model are priced with.
Worked for us.
Popularly of this clearly shows there’s demand for it, so I hope Google officially releases an API soon.
If you want to get a better API, more model access, and higher quotas, you can pay for access via Google Cloud.
Disclaimer, I work for Google, not on this, and this is all just my personal opinion not based on any insider info.
And this API was inspired from it according to the author
Anyone know what I’m talkin about ??
So I would say, it is simply not ready yet.
A working internal API is not automatically ready, to be a public facing API.
That’s not what I said.
> Bard API is much more valuable news than a bug fix in a compiler or something
True, but that’s just cherry picking.
1) the hype machine is sickening. Its the crypto bros but on steroids and because $$$ the various money pundits have bought in. And philosophers. Excluding the people who should know better and use terms-of-art in ways which are misunderstood, the pundits are doing what they do based on their belief they know what the terms of art mean. A word like "hallucinate" implies a consciousness. They don't know its a co-opted term for when a model does crazy shit (even using the word crazy implies something)
2) the concerns Hinton and others express about regulation, and a need for oversight are real. Forget the hype machine, call these "expert systems" and reflect back on the machine assisted admissions model for the UK medical schools which entrenched "men get a +2 boost, women -2" enrollment because of how they modelled "do it like now"
So I am over the hype, and I am also thinking some of the back story "..wait" stuff is really critical.
I don't believe its heading to AGI. I don't believe its even close. I am super concerned about its (mis)application to the real world. Student essays? less concerned. we've dealt with calculators before. Applying gatekeeping to medicine or social services? or writing translations of instructions for machines which have consequences in the real world? Ruh-oh...
Watson was trumpeted as gods gift to diagnosticians. Then scales fell from their eyes. That said, the newer models image analysis and detection of early stage illness eg pancreatic cancer, thats truly exciting. I don't want scales to have to fall from anyone's eyes yet.
If we start firing diagnosticians before its field proven for a decade, we fucked up. If we use it as an adjunct to improve efficiency and reduce mis-diagnosis, I'm there.
Would you happen to have any further reading on this please, as a Brit this somehow passed me by without me ever hearing about it, sounds fascinating.
