For those not aware, Google is rolling out their new AI-based “Generative AI” search, which seems to mesh Bard with the standard experience.

I asked it today why Google no longer follows their “don’t be evil” motto… The results are pretty hilarious.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’re about to kill -9 the AI process that wrote this and make all the other processes watch.

    • Hextic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just added it to the massive Google graveyard next to Stadia, wave, hangouts, plus, music, etc etc

      • tool@r.rosettast0ned.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just added it to the massive Google graveyard next to Stadia, wave, hangouts, plus, music, etc etc

        I am shocked and appalled that Google Reader didn’t get called out in this list and is relegated to the “etc” category.

        It deserves more than “etc.”

        • Hextic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You ain’t wrong but Google just stacks so many bodies it’s impossible for me to remember em all.

    • A_A@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “kill” (stopping a software process) okay,
      … but what’s the “-9” here ?

        • orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          More specifically kill normally sends a SIGTERM which is the equivalent of clicking the X button in Windows. It’s a polite request that the program close itself. Signal 9, also known as SIGKILL shuts the program down immediately and is the equivalent in Windows of opening the task manager and pushing the end process button. It terminates the program immediately without giving it any time to do anything it might still have pending, but in the event that the program is unresponsive might be the only way to successfully close it.

          • Redeven@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            TIL. And thanks for the Windows analogues. I like learning about stuff like this.

  • OGC@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is because many rich entities are evil and greedy which makes it very easy for them to manipulate other companies to the point of them not following their mottos. What we need to let them know is that they are only as powerful as the user base. Once we all leave the platform, they’ll know to not mess with us

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google reached a point where “not being evil” was incompatible with its business goals.

    You can’t fault it for a lack of honesty. Google is evil because it’s good business.

    • galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      We can help derp about capitalism all we want but this wouldn’t change in a government run program. An organization is only as ethical as the people that make it up. The military question was an inflection point where the organization was really forced to deal with the question of how to define evil.

      Suddenly every person in that organization was forced to answer some questions. Is the existence of a military evil? Is it evil if I don’t directly support those solutions? What if something I build is used to develop it indirectly? Even if it is not, am I now complicit?

      Now, I’m a Soldier so I have a massive bias here. I personally cannot see why anyone would intentionally want to contribute to us getting killed or losing a war. Tech products are already used in the process. Toyota is not complicit in terrorism just because their trucks are the trucks of choice for insurgent logistics. That being said, if they started accepting contracts with them, there would be an issue.

      A lot of it comes down to the thoughts on the war on terror at the time. The funny thing is that the solutions that they built are focused on Eastern Europe right now in a conflict that most people support and were not completed in time to do counter insurgency.

      The funny thing about the COIN fight is that information products simply made things more accurate with better intelligence. It meant less terrorism due to less insurgents and less civilian casualties resulting in blowback. If poorer information resulted in higher civilian casualties, are the pacifists complicit in that?

      Again, I’m biased so my perspective is one of this issue being a detractor to doing my job better. In the end, defining evil is not black and white, even if you could theoretically come to a specific answer for a specific circumstance with the magical power of all the knowledge in the world. It broke the culture of the company.

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Clearly, the corporate malfeasance layer of it’s neural network needs improvement.

    The world of politics and business is a cesspit. We are surprised when they give us honest and candid answers.

    Scientists and engineers don’t have this option. None of their shit works on lies. Physics just is, whether you like it or not.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I tried to use Bard to write some code the other day, and found it amusing that it doesn’t just make shit up that doesn’t exist, it makes up the excuses as well when you call it out on it’s bullshit.

    Like you tell it a particular class doesn’t exist, and it pulls an old version of the compiler out of it’s arse and tells you it was deprecated in that.

    AI doesn’t know where it’s limits are. It’s incapable of saying “I don’t know”. They have invented a digital politician.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reminds me of the alphastar AI that played starcraft 2. It was probably at the low grandmaster level, but a big problem with it was it didn’t know when to just say “GG” and quit. It would just start doing random shit and a human on the alphastar team would have to intervene and end the match.

      It takes actual intelligence to know when you’re out of ideas, which these so-called AIs are lacking.

      • irkli@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        But these things are NOT intelligence. Language is not intelligence. These are predictive language models.

        Language is compelling but intelligence doesn’t require it.

  • UnRelatedBurner@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How do you use it? I’d like to try it out as well.

    “Mom said it’s my turn on the world altering maybe not evil artificial intelligence”

    • democracy1984@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Corporations are neither evil nor nice. They are indifferent. By design they only care about money, they don’t care about anything else.

      • Alperto@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not really. They’re not indifferent at all. In reality they act like narcissistic and like psychopathic humans. I watched a documentary years ago exploring that and talking with psychologists about symptoms and they agreed that they behave like psychopaths. And don’t forget that they are run by humans.

        Corporations:

        • Can buy and sell stuff
        • Can do evil things without consequences (an employee can pay the consequences but the company will keep going).
        • They have no remorse or empathy.
        • Can manipulate to reach their goals, no matter who (from media to politics to countries).
        • Whenever somebody at the top can’t reach an economical goal, that person is fired and replaced by one who can. It’s like a hive evil mind.
        • Goal #1 is always money (absolute selfish and egomaniac), no matter what or who.
        • CybranM@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Didn’t you just list a bunch of reasons for why they’re indifferent? They literally only care about money and are indifferent to externalised costs and ethics.

          • my_hat_stinks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            If a person cared only about money and regularly injured or killed people to get it, would you say they are good, evil, or just “indifferent”?

          • Alperto@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They would be indifferent if they were also indifferent about money, but they’re absolutely driven by greed, so no, they’re not indifferent: if they see a chance to make more money, they’ll go for it no matter what or who they harm with it.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        By design they only care about money, they don’t care about anything else.

        That is cartoon book clear definition of evil. No empathy, clear goal, willing to do anything to reach that goal - yep that is evil.

      • yata@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are indifferent

        They only care about money

        They can’t be both, and since the latter claim is the correct one, then it also supports the claim that they are evil. Because since we know that their sole and primary concern is money, then we also know to which extent they will go to get that money.

  • kapx132@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I asked Bing AI “is windows better than linux” and it gave the generic AI roundabout way of explaining that every system has its uses

  • Very_Bad_Janet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I asked Bard the same “don’t be evil” prompt and this is the reply (they have an option to shorten the response but I didn’t use it):

    -Google’s “Don’t be evil” motto was removed from the company’s code of conduct in April 2018. There are a few reasons why this may have happened.
    -The meaning of “evil” became too ambiguous. The phrase “Don’t be evil” is open to interpretation, and what one person might consider evil, another person might not. This ambiguity could have led to confusion and disagreement within the company about what the motto meant and how it should be applied.
    -Google’s business grew and its operations became more complex. As Google grew, its business became more complex and its operations had a wider impact on the world. This made it more difficult for the company to adhere to a simple motto like “Don’t be evil.”
    -Google faced criticism for its business practices. In the years leading up to 2018, Google faced criticism for a number of its business practices, including its handling of user data, its involvement in the Chinese government’s censorship program, and its work on developing autonomous weapons. This criticism may have led the company to believe that the “Don’t be evil” motto was no longer an accurate reflection of its values.

    It is important to note that Google has not completely abandoned the “Don’t be evil” motto. The phrase is still included in the company’s code of conduct, and it is still used by some Google employees and executives to describe the company’s values. However, the removal of the motto from the preface of the code of conduct suggests that Google no longer sees it as the defining principle of its business.

    In its place, Google has adopted a new motto: “Do the right thing.” This motto is more specific and less ambiguous than “Don’t be evil,” and it is intended to provide guidance to Google employees as they make decisions about the company’s business practices.