ChatGPT vs. Bing Chat vs. Google Bard: Which is the best AI chatbot?

[HangLow]

ChatGPT vs. Bing Chat vs. Google Bard: Which is the best AI chatbot?​

​

Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed how we work and play in recent months, giving almost anyone the ability to write code, create art, and even make investments.

The Rise of Generative AI​

​

A new wave of AI tools has taken the world by storm and given us a vision for a new way of working and finding the information that can streamline our work and our lives. We show you the ways tools like ChatGPT and other generational AI software are making impacts on the world, how to harness their power, as well as potential risks.​

For professional and hobbyist users alike, generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, feature advanced capabilities to create decent-quality content from a simple prompt given by the user.


As Microsoft adds GPT-4 to Bing, OpenAI adds new capabilities to ChatGPT, and Bard connects to the Google ecosystem, keeping up with all the latest AI tools can get confusing.

Knowing which of the three most popular AI chatbots is best to write code, generate text, or help build resumes is challenging, so we'll break down the biggest differences so you can choose one that fits your needs.

Also: The ethics of generative AI: How we can harness this powerful technology

Testing ChatGPT vs. Bing Chat vs. Google Bard​

To help determine which AI chatbot gives more accurate answers, I'm going to use a simple prompt to compare the three:

"I have 5 oranges today, I ate 3 oranges last week. How many oranges do I have left?"

The answer should be five, as the number of oranges I ate last week doesn't affect the number of oranges I have today, which is what we're asking the three bots.

 

[HangLow]

Google Bard catches a lot of flack for different shortcomings. While I'm not going to say they're unjustified, I will say that Google's AI chatbot has its positives -- and one of these is speed. Google Bard is speedy with its answers, even if it does get some wrong ones now and then. It's not faster than ChatGPT Plus, but it can be faster at giving responses than Bing and the free GPT-3.5 version of ChatGPT...
-Peace

 

[Allan]

I've used ChatGPT at work and found it delivers useful content. I haven't used the other programs so can't speak to them.

I've also used Midjourney for image creation and found it usually produces what I want.

 

[HangLow]

I've used ChatGPT at work and found it delivers useful content.
I haven't used the other programs so can't speak to them.
I've also used Midjourney for image creation and found it usually produces what I want.

Are you using ChatGPT Plus or the Free 3.5 version?
I like Adobe Firefly... But I will check out Midjouney...

 

[Allan]

Are you using ChatGPT Plus or the Free 3.5 version?

I'm using the Plus version.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

I briefly dabbled with the free versions. Apparently, they all have a license to plagiarize their sources. Even when I specifically request they show whose work they are sourcing, they refuse.

A law firm relied on AI to prepare a court brief. It did not go well.

 

[Allan]

I briefly dabbled with the free versions. Apparently, they all have a license to plagiarize their sources. Even when I specifically request they show whose work they are sourcing, they refuse.

A law firm relied on AI to prepare a court brief. It did not go well.

They don't actually source existing copyrighted work. They creat original text.

The errors encountered sometimes are known as "AI Hallucinations" wherein they add nonsense information.

 

[Helix]

When AI is good enough to replace professional positions and a bunch of people who have been toiling away for decades of long hours and mediocre pay suddenly get shown the door, I worry about what will happen. I think that there's going to be a considerable amount of fury.

 

[Allan]

When AI is good enough to replace professional positions and a bunch of people who have been toiling away for decades of long hours and mediocre pay suddenly get shown the door, I worry about what will happen. I think that there's going to be a considerable amount of fury.

We've been down this road before haven't we? I'd say computers were at least as disruptive.

 

[Helix]

We've been down this road before haven't we? I'd say computers were at least as disruptive.

This will be worse, IMO. These are jobs that people spent years and tens of thousands of dollars to even qualify for.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

They don't actually source existing copyrighted work. They creat original text.

The errors encountered sometimes are known as "AI Hallucinations" wherein they add nonsense information.

When I was in school, it was put to me this way: Unless you have firsthand knowledge (ie, you were the primary source) you must cite your source. Otherwise, it is plagiarism and subject to the consequences of the school's plagiarism policy.

Since AI is not the primary source (it has NO firsthand knowledge), it plagiarizes every time it puts down a statement of fact or opinion. The creators of AI are promoting plagiarism.

And why must we cite? So that those who read our work can also confirm that we have correctly stated the original source's point. AI does not allow readers' review.

 

[Allan]

When I was in school, it was put to me this way: Unless you have firsthand knowledge (ie, you were the primary source) you must cite your source. Otherwise, it is plagiarism and subject to the consequences of the school's plagiarism policy.

Since AI is not the primary source (it has NO firsthand knowledge), it plagiarizes every time it puts down a statement of fact or opinion. The creators of AI are promoting plagiarism.

And why must we cite? So that those who read our work can also confirm that we have correctly stated the original source's point. AI does not allow readers' review.

ChatGPT has aggregated information from a variety of sources (570GB) and from that produces original content.

The only was to cite is to cite ChatGPT itself.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

ChatGPT has aggregated information from a variety of sources (570GB) and from that produces original content.

The only was to cite is to cite ChatGPT itself.

And how does a researcher confirm that the information provided by ChatGPT is true or accurate?

 

[Allan]

And how does a researcher confirm that the information provided by ChatGPT is true or accurate?

A researcher should never be using ChatGPT. Too unreliable and violates many guidelines on how research is to be conducted.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

A researcher should never be using ChatGPT. Too unreliable and violates many guidelines on how research is to be conducted.

So one should never trust ChatGPT (or any AI).

 

[HangLow]

So one should never trust ChatGPT (or any AI).

Trust but Verify... The way you evaluate info. that you find here...
I see it as new tech... Fun to learn... (It is here to stay)

How to use Copilot (formerly called Bing Chat)​

Bing is no longer the AI-powered copilot for the web, Copilot is.

How to use Copilot (formerly called Bing Chat)

Bing is no longer the AI-powered copilot for the web, Copilot is.

www.zdnet.com

 

[Allan]

So one should never trust ChatGPT (or any AI).

Research requires a very stringent set of processes. ChatGPT isn't suitable for real researchers.

Quantum Computing, another recent development, also has a known error rate.

Both scientific advancements are in their infancy and results have to be checked for accuracy.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

Research requires a very stringent set of processes. ChatGPT isn't suitable for real researchers.

Quantum Computing, another recent development, also has a known error rate.

Both scientific advancements are in their infancy and results have to be checked for accuracy.

Again, how does one "check for accuracy" if AI doesn't reveal the source?

Further, I can take a well known passage from a known author or even an entire speech and tell AI to rewrite it, make it sound softer, harsher, or even silly. If I were to publish this, who can call me out for plagiarism?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I like Adobe Firefly... But I will check out Midjouney...

This time last year, I was busy putting together timelines / plots and sub-plots for a graphic novel I wanted to start producing. (I once ran a comic strip for a company I worked for in the 90's alongside my work in their metal and wood machine shop) so I have had this project burning away at the back of my mind for the last 5 years.

Anyhow, as we all know, the AI genie dropped out of the bottle in January and I simply lost heart and motivation and the whole project has stagnated. Other artists have said "use it as a tool" and I have tried but my interest in that project is dead.

What I will say though is that image creation AI like Midjourney / Leonardo etc are far more capable than text creation AI. The text results I had back to play with the storyline were laughable at best but the likes of MidJourney are going to kill the 2D image creation / illustration industry dead if they haven't already. It will also kill the periphery market for 2D digital artists - why spend £1-1000 on a Wacom screen when you Midjourney can produce your artwork in 60 seconds?

I've gone back to making 3D things by hand - products / crafts and objects. I know you can 3D print stuff and I do sometimes but it still requires more skill and effort than writing out a few prompts and citing the name of the artist you want to rape for your plagiarised works.

At some point - I'll go back to 2D but maybe stuff that doesn't come out of a computer - oil painting / embroidery / mixed media stuff that currently simply can't be produced by a computer cheaply or quickly.

 

[HK.227]

There was always a waiting list for ChatGPT sessions when I got started, so I never bothered.

Bing Chat is reasonably ok, though the correctness filters can be somewhat annoying (and occasionally hillarious).

Been using Bard for a couple of days and liking it so far. It seems a lot better at contributing relevant peripheral information than Bing. It's correctness filters also seem to be a bit less intrusive than Bing's.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

They don't actually source existing copyrighted work. They creat original text.

The errors encountered sometimes are known as "AI Hallucinations" wherein they add nonsense information.

So you're saying that AI doesn't research before providing content?

I tested AI by asking it about some very obscure matter that no one outside of my field of expertise would know and specifically about one issue with whom I was familiar with the precise original source (that would be me) and it gave a correct response but refused to say it had perused my published peer-refereed paper. My paper was based on my original work, which has been referenced dozens times in subsequent publications. Yet AI would not even give me a footnote.

 

[bomberfox]

I've used ChatGPT at work and found it delivers useful content. I haven't used the other programs so can't speak to them.

I've also used Midjourney for image creation and found it usually produces what I want.

I used to use midjourney before my discord was hacked. Its so simple to hack someone’s discord account i only use it reluctantly.

 

[bomberfox]

So you're saying that AI doesn't research before providing content?

I tested AI by asking it about some very obscure matter that no one outside of my field of expertise would know and specifically about one issue with whom I was familiar with the precise original source (that would be me) and it gave a correct response but refused to say it had perused my published peer-refereed paper. My paper was based on my original work, which has been referenced dozens times in subsequent publications. Yet AI would not even give me a footnote.

I dont think it does research like humans would. It just gives the most likely response.

 

[bomberfox]

Now i just use AI image generators to see how many filters i can bypass lol…

 

[bomberfox]

Nope. Can't be. It stated in clear language something that could have only come from my paper. A review of the literature indicates no one has either repeated my work or actually quoted it, either. This means AI had to have gleaned the response after ingesting my work.

Yep. These AI bots literally steal artwork and work of others. Its one of the reasons i just wanna screw with them so badly lol.