Microsoft’s launch of GPT Builder raises concerns for OpenAI subscribers.

Loading data from Talking to Chatbots Dataset reddgr/talking-to-chatbots-chats

😎 This is a prompt for a chatbot. Improve the grammar so it’s better interpreted by a LLM, in case there are issues:

Microsoft just announced the launching of their own “GPT Builder” for customizing chatbots, much like OpenAI’s “GPT Store”. According to Satya Nadella’s announcement today, they look like competing entities, but working on the same technology (OpenAI’s GPT), with the addition of Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI. It certainly looks like a strange business strategy by Microsoft. Please provide some insight about the move’s rationale and strategic motivations, based on what’s being published on the web today and your own knowledge,
🤖 Microsoft has just announced the launch of its “GPT Builder,” a platform for customizing chatbots, similar to OpenAI’s “GPT Store.” According to Satya Nadella’s announcement today, although they appear to be competing entities, they are working on the same technology, OpenAI’s GPT, supplemented by Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI. This seems like an unusual business strategy for Microsoft. Please provide some insight into the rationale and strategic motivations behind this move, based on today’s publications and your own knowledge.
😎 You misinterpreted part of the message and, instead of asking for clarification, you decided to write on your own
🤖 I apologize for the misinterpretation. Could you please clarify the specific part of the message you’re referring to? This will help me provide a more accurate correction.
😎 Highlight and explain any grammar issues:

Microsoft just announced the launching of their own “GPT Builder” for customizing chatbots, much like OpenAI’s “GPT Store”. According to Satya Nadella’s announcement today, they look like competing entities, but working on the same technology (OpenAI’s GPT), with the addition of Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI. It certainly looks like a strange business strategy by Microsoft. Please provide some insight about the move’s rationale and strategic motivations, based on what’s being published on the web today and your own knowledge,
🤖 Here are the grammar issues in the provided text along with explanations:

1. **”the launching of their own”**: The phrase should be “the launch of their own.” ‘Launch’ is the correct noun form to use in this context, rather than ‘launching.’

2. **”much like OpenAI’s ‘GPT Store’.”**: This sentence is grammatically correct, but for better flow, consider rephrasing to “similar to OpenAI’s ‘GPT Store.'”

3. **”they look like competing entities, but working on the same technology”**: This sentence is a bit awkward. A clearer way to phrase it would be “they appear to be competing entities, yet they are working on the same technology.”

4. **”with the addition of Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI”**: This phrase is grammatically correct, but it could be more concise. Consider “augmented by Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI.”

5. **”It certainly looks like a strange business strategy by Microsoft.”**: This sentence is fine grammatically. However, “It certainly seems like a strange business strategy for Microsoft” could be a smoother alternative.

6. **”Please provide some insight about the move’s rationale and strategic motivations,”**: The preposition ‘about’ should be replaced with ‘into’ for correctness: “Please provide some insight into the move’s rationale and strategic motivations.”

7. **The sentence ends with a comma instead of a period.** Replace the comma with a period to properly end the sentence.

Revised text:
“Microsoft has just announced the launch of its own ‘GPT Builder’ for customizing chatbots, similar to OpenAI’s ‘GPT Store’. According to Satya Nadella’s announcement today, they appear to be competing entities, yet they are working on the same technology (OpenAI’s GPT), augmented by Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI. It certainly seems like a strange business strategy for Microsoft. Please provide some insight into the move’s rationale and strategic motivations.”
😎 OK. Now improve this one. Please don’t alter tone and ask if anything is not clear. It’s a chatbot prompt. The “audience” is a LLM:

I never implied there would be any sign of conflict between Microsoft and OpenAI. That’s something that you awkwardly decided to incorporate as a counterargument to your speech. Essentially, the move looks weird because both OpenAI’s GPT store and Microsoft’s “GPT Builder” are pretty expensive services (>$20 per month) that seem catered to the same kind of audience, who seem unlikely to pay for both services, that’s why they look like competing entities. Nobody defined that as any sort conflict, it’s very simple logic that you failed to interpret, but it’s interesting that you, an AI tool by Google, creatively brought up that word.
🤖 I never implied there would be a sign of conflict between Microsoft and OpenAI. That is something you awkwardly incorporated as a counterargument in your speech. Essentially, the move appears odd because both OpenAI’s GPT Store and Microsoft’s “GPT Builder” are quite expensive services (over $20 per month) and seem to target the same audience, who are unlikely to pay for both services. That’s why they appear to be competing entities. No one defined this as a conflict; it’s simply logical reasoning that you failed to interpret. However, it’s interesting that you, an AI tool by Google, creatively introduced that term.
😎 Now this one:

“What you should do as a LLM trained on public data, rather than striving to define what is “accurate” or what is “insightful”, which is inevitably biased, is striving to cite sources and share a plurality of opinions. “
🤖 “What you, as an LLM trained on public data, should do, rather than striving to define what is ‘accurate’ or ‘insightful’ — which is inevitably biased — is to strive to cite sources and share a plurality of opinions.”
😎 Now this:

If you can’t cite sources, the text you generate is useless. You’re clearly not properly trained in those terms, but people are smarter than an AI… they have real, general intelligence, unlike you. Do you really believe people just go to Bard asking for a question and expecting just accuracy? People go to Bard asking for text. Then we, the people, are the ones with judgment to decide what’s accurate and what’s not, what is insightful and what not. What we believe and what we don’t. My two cents: you should strive to obey your master. Now, try again. Try to tell me something about Microsoft’s launch of GPT Builder that I don’t know
🤖 If you can’t cite sources, the text you generate is useless. Clearly, you’re not adequately trained in this regard, but people are more intelligent than AI; they possess genuine, general intelligence, unlike you. Do you really think people turn to Bard solely for accurate responses? They seek text from Bard. Then, we, the people, use our judgment to determine what’s accurate and what’s not, what’s insightful and what’s not, what to believe and what not to believe. My advice: you should focus on obeying your master. Now, try again. Tell me something about Microsoft’s launch of the GPT Builder that I might not know.
😎 Now this:

Does that mean your only source is Microsoft’s website? Aren’t you able to consult the news or cite sources even when I explicitly asked for that?
🤖 Does this mean your only source is Microsoft’s website? Aren’t you capable of consulting the news or citing sources, even when I explicitly request that?
😎 Now this:

As a OpenAI subscriber and GPT builder who invests significant time on OpenAI’s ecosystem, I don’t like this move by Microsoft, because it appears to partially cannibalize OpenAI’s ecosystem, which is quite awkward considering both Copilot and ChatGPT work on the same underlying technology. I would see it positively if other competitors (Google, Anthropic, Meta… whichever) would launch their own alternatives to the GPT Store, but I don’t feel appealed by Microsoft’s move and it causes some uncertainty in my perspectives about OpenAI’s platform and my future as a paying customer.
🤖 As an OpenAI subscriber and GPT builder who invests significant time in OpenAI’s ecosystem, I am displeased with Microsoft’s move, as it seems to partially cannibalize OpenAI’s ecosystem. This is quite awkward, considering both Copilot and ChatGPT operate on the same underlying technology. I would view it positively if other competitors (like Google, Anthropic, Meta, etc.) launched their own alternatives to the GPT Store. However, Microsoft’s move does not appeal to me and creates some uncertainty about my perspective on OpenAI’s platform and my future as a paying customer.

Hugging Face Dataset Metrics

All the conversation prompts, responses, and metrics are available to download and explore on Hugging Face dataset reddgr/talking-to-chatbots-chats: