zlacker

>>ssgodd+(OP)
Surprised they don't mention Bard anywhere in the article. I wonder if the NYT has worked out some sort of licensing deal with Google for Bard, or if Bard isn't trained on NYT data?

The lawsuit mentions this, so maybe they did work out some agreement to license their data: "For months, The Times has attempted to reach a negotiated agreement with Defendants, in accordance with its history of working productively with large technology platforms to permit the use of its content in new digital products (including the news products developed by Google, Meta, and Apple)."

>>prepos+E3
Maybe Bard's apparent "behindness" is less about Google's technical merits or lack thereof, and more about it being built with a sense of legal maturity that the competitors don't yet have. After all, Google must have some experience in this space, and we've seen them simply refuse to deploy Bard in regions where (presumably) there is too much legal uncertainty. If 2024's Gemini performs similarly to GPT4 while also navigating legal landmines, maybe it comes out ahead.

Or maybe Bard's lawsuit just hasn't come yet.