Ok, I'm sure Bard has a lot of negative comments about websites in its training set to draw upon, but the actual text doesn't have a lot to do with the site it was asked to "review" (https://betterstacks.com/). Two of the points are debatable (although the design looks pretty modern to me), but the call to action is definitely there: two buttons "Get started - its free!" (whoops, might want to fix that spelling mistake) and "Add to chrome" (maybe use uppercase?). So: like most things generated by LLMs, this looks impressive at first glance, but if you care to dig a bit deeper, it doesn't anymore...
I think the page does have a lot of problems as well, but most of those are ones that bard can't really see. Things like cluttered images, and animated gifs that are halfway off the page when you initially arrive.
I agree on the call to action, it is definately there. Main improvement I'd really want to see would be a single, clear example of what it does. I get a sort-of gist, but for a tool whose main value proposition focuses on being better than other tools, I can't really see what it's actually like to use. I'd guess someone like myself is in the target audience for this but its hard to know enough to care about installing it
Actually now that I think about it, the "get started" leading straight into a login page is pretty rubbish. Probably get rid of that and just go with "add to chrome". Presumably you'll have to log in later anyways, but with the addon installed users have a bit more buy-in to complete the flow.
Given that it probably can't run JS to render the page, it might be finding the raw HTML similar to dated websites? If I turn on noscript, the page does not load.
OP's asking the blind to rate their painting and we're all surprised when they make it all up. Try it on a git repo, it performs much better.
Comments
Ok, I'm sure Bard has a lot of negative comments about websites in its training set to draw upon, but the actual text doesn't have a lot to do with the site it was asked to "review" (https://betterstacks.com/). Two of the points are debatable (although the design looks pretty modern to me), but the call to action is definitely there: two buttons "Get started - its free!" (whoops, might want to fix that spelling mistake) and "Add to chrome" (maybe use uppercase?). So: like most things generated by LLMs, this looks impressive at first glance, but if you care to dig a bit deeper, it doesn't anymore...
I'm sure the LLM never actually "saw" the website but instead hallucinated a generic website roast.
Absolubtely.
I think the page does have a lot of problems as well, but most of those are ones that bard can't really see. Things like cluttered images, and animated gifs that are halfway off the page when you initially arrive.
I agree on the call to action, it is definately there. Main improvement I'd really want to see would be a single, clear example of what it does. I get a sort-of gist, but for a tool whose main value proposition focuses on being better than other tools, I can't really see what it's actually like to use. I'd guess someone like myself is in the target audience for this but its hard to know enough to care about installing it
Actually now that I think about it, the "get started" leading straight into a login page is pretty rubbish. Probably get rid of that and just go with "add to chrome". Presumably you'll have to log in later anyways, but with the addon installed users have a bit more buy-in to complete the flow.
Given that it probably can't run JS to render the page, it might be finding the raw HTML similar to dated websites? If I turn on noscript, the page does not load.
OP's asking the blind to rate their painting and we're all surprised when they make it all up. Try it on a git repo, it performs much better.
Yeah agree with you there - it was a fun read though.