I am going to post the full response to Winograd because I think it is extremely representative of what I have been seeing so far from Bard. I can’t help but be incredibly disappointed.

Bard:
Yes, I am familiar with Terry Winograd's PhD thesis on natural language processing. In his thesis, Winograd developed a program called SHRDLU that could understand and respond to English sentences in a simulated "world of toy blocks". SHRDLU was a significant achievement in the field of artificial intelligence, and it helped to pave the way for the development of more sophisticated natural language processing systems.

My natural language ability is much more advanced than SHRDLU's. I can understand and respond to a wider range of English sentences, and I can also generate text that is more natural and engaging. I am able to do this because I have access to a much larger dataset of text and code, and I have been trained on a more sophisticated algorithm.

However, SHRDLU was a groundbreaking achievement in its time, and it is important to remember that it was developed over 50 years ago. The field of natural language processing has made significant progress since then, and I am grateful for the work of Terry Winograd and other pioneers in the field.

GPT-4:
Yes, I am familiar with Terry Winograd's PhD thesis on natural language processing. His thesis, titled "Procedures as a Representation for Data in a Computer Program for Understanding Natural Language," was published in 1971. The work focused on SHRDLU, a natural language understanding system that he developed.

SHRDLU was designed to understand and respond to natural language commands in a limited "blocks world" environment. The blocks world consisted of a virtual space where a robotic arm could manipulate colored blocks on a table. Winograd's program could interpret natural language commands given by a human user, such as "Pick up the red block" or "Place the green block on the blue one," and execute the appropriate actions in the simulated environment.

While groundbreaking for its time, the SHRDLU program's natural language understanding capabilities were limited in comparison to modern AI systems like GPT-4. Some key differences between SHRDLU and GPT-4 include:

1. *Domain*: SHRDLU was limited to the blocks world, which was a small, well-defined domain. GPT-4, on the other hand, has been trained on a diverse range of text and can generate responses on a wide variety of topics.

2. *Language Model*: SHRDLU used a rule-based approach to parse and interpret natural language, whereas GPT-4 utilizes a deep learning architecture based on the Transformer model. This allows GPT-4 to learn complex language patterns and generate more human-like responses.

3. *Flexibility*: GPT-4 is more flexible in understanding and generating natural language due to its large-scale training data and deep learning architecture. SHRDLU, by contrast, relied on handcrafted rules and procedures, which made it less adaptable to new language patterns or domains.

4. *Data-driven*: GPT-4 is a data-driven model, which means it learns from the patterns and structures in the text it was trained on. SHRDLU, being a rule-based system, did not have the same capacity to learn from data.

Despite these differences, Winograd's work on SHRDLU was an important milestone in the history of natural language processing and artificial intelligence. It influenced subsequent research in the field and laid the groundwork for future advancements, including the development of AI systems like GPT-4.