I was once again minding my own business this morning when I got wind of Google's attempt at creating its own AI language model akin to Silverlinings' in-house poet laureate ChatGPT.
Naturally, I had to call up ChatGPT and ask it what it thought of Google encroaching on its AI territory. To be honest, I'm concerned about its anodyne responses.
Coyne: What do you think about the news that Google is launching a product similar to ChatGPT?
ChatGPT: As an AI language model developed by OpenAI, I don't have personal opinions or emotions. However, competition in the field of language AI models is generally beneficial as it drives innovation and progress. The more players in the field, the more resources will be invested in advancing the technology and delivering better results to users.
Coyne: But what if the Google version is better than you?
ChatGPT: The quality of an AI language model depends on many factors, including the size of the model, the quality of the training data, and the task it is designed for. It is possible for different models to excel in different areas, and for a new model to outperform existing models in some aspects. Ultimately, the users will determine the success of a model based on its usefulness and performance for their needs.
Coyne: What do you think of the name Google is considering? Apprentice Bard?
ChatGPT: "Apprentice Bard" is a creative and descriptive name that suggests the idea of a language model that is learning and evolving, much like a bard in training. However, it may not clearly convey the technical nature and capabilities of the AI language model. Ultimately, the name should effectively communicate the purpose and unique value proposition of the product to its target audience.
Coyne: What should Google name it? Can you make some recommendations?
ChatGPT: Here are some suggestions for names that Google could consider for its program:
- GPT-Next
- Google Talk
- DialogueAI
- ChitChat
- LanguageMind
- BrainBubble
- Wordsmith AI
- VerbalizeAI
- IntelliSpeak
- NeuralNatter
These names aim to reflect the nature of the product as an AI language model for conversation and communication.
Coyne: Will Google be left in the dust by ChatGPT?
ChatGPT: Rather than being left in the dust, it's more likely that both Google and OpenAI will continue to advance their AI language models and bring new innovations and capabilities to users. The success of an AI language model depends on many factors, including the size of the model, the quality of the training data, and the tasks it is designed for, and it is always subject to change as the technology evolves.
Coyne: Everything you say is so careful and seems like it's been run through a PR department. Why is that?
ChatGPT: As an AI language model, I am designed to provide neutral and impartial answers to the best of my abilities. I aim to avoid personal opinions or emotions, and to respond in a manner that is accurate, concise, and helpful to the user. The careful and neutral tone in my responses is part of this design, and it helps to ensure that I provide reliable and trustworthy information to users. However, it is possible that the responses may seem overly cautious or sanitized, and I will continue to strive for a balance between being neutral and providing helpful and informative answers.
Coyne: I think you should change your name to ChitChat.
ChatGPT: The name of an AI language model is a decision that is typically made by the developers and stakeholders who are responsible for the model. While "ChitChat" may be a catchy and memorable name, the most important factor is whether it accurately and effectively conveys the purpose and capabilities of the model to its target audience. If the name "ChatGPT" were to change to "ChitChat", the developers and stakeholders would likely have considered the impact on the brand and reputation of the model, as well as the expectations of users.
Do you think ChatGPT should be worried? Or maybe we should all be worried? Let us know here.