I looked at is as if it were a good aspirational target for 5 years from now. It was obvious the whole video was edited together not real time.
Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
101–110 of 683 posts
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#102How is this not false advertising?
It's a software demo. If you ever gave an honest demo, you gave a bad demo. If you ever saw a good and honest demo, you were fooled.
I prefer to let my software be good enough to let it speak for itself without resorting to fraud, thank you ver much.
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#103it was obviously marketing material, but if this tweet is right, then it was just blatant false advertising.
Google always does fake advertising. “Unlimited” google drive accounts for example. They just have such a beastly legal team no one is going to challenge them on anything like that.
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#104I was fooled. The model release announcement said it could accept video and audio multi-modal input. I understood that there was a lot of editing and cutting, but I really believed I was looking at an example of video and audio input. I was completely impressed since it’s quite a leap to go from text and still images to “eyes and ears.” There’s even the segment where instruments are drown and music was generated. I t…
Exactly. Personally I’m fine with both:
1) Forward looking demoes that demonstrate the future of your product, where it’s clear that you’re not there yet but working in that direction
or
2) Demoes that show off current capabilities, but are scripted and edited to do so in the best light possible.
Both of those are standard practice and acceptable. What Google did was just wrong. They deserve to face backlash for this.
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#105That's not the only thing wrong. Gemini makes a false statement in the video, serving as a great demonstration of how these models still outright lie so frequently, so casually, and so convincingly that you won't notice, even if you have a whole team of researchers and video editors reviewing the output. It's the single biggest problem with LLMs and Gemini isn't solving it. You simply can't rely on them when correctn…
This seems to be a common view among some folks. Personally, I'm impartial.
Search or even asking other expert human beings are prone to provide incorrect results. I'm unsure where this expectation of 100% absolute correctness comes from. I'm sure there are use cases, but I assume it's the vast minority and most can tolerate larger than expected inaccuracies.
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#106The bloomberg article gives 404 for me
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#107The whole Gemini webpage and contents felt weird to me, it's in the uncanny valley of trying to look and feel like an Apple marketing piece. The hyperbolic language, surgically precise ethnic/gender diversity, unnecessary animations and the sales pitch from the CEO felt like a small player in the field trying to pass as a big one.
I got the same vibes. Ultra and Pro. It feels tacky that it declares the "Gemini era" before it's even available. Google really want to be seen as level on the playing field.
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#108That's not the only thing wrong. Gemini makes a false statement in the video, serving as a great demonstration of how these models still outright lie so frequently, so casually, and so convincingly that you won't notice, even if you have a whole team of researchers and video editors reviewing the output. It's the single biggest problem with LLMs and Gemini isn't solving it. You simply can't rely on them when correctn…
[dead]
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#109That's not the only thing wrong. Gemini makes a false statement in the video, serving as a great demonstration of how these models still outright lie so frequently, so casually, and so convincingly that you won't notice, even if you have a whole team of researchers and video editors reviewing the output. It's the single biggest problem with LLMs and Gemini isn't solving it. You simply can't rely on them when correctn…
I totally agree with you on the confident lies. And it’s really tough. Technically the duck is made out of air and plastic right? If I pushed the model further on the composition of a rubber duck, and it failed to mention its construction, then it’d be lying. However there is this disgusting part of language where a statement can be misleading, technically true, not the whole truth, missing caveats etc. Very challeng…
No, the density of the object is less than water, not the density of the material. The Duck is made of plastic, and it traps air. Similarly, you can make a boat that floats in water out of concrete or metal. It is an important distinction when trying to understand buoyancy.
Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hard disagree. I could type your whole comment without any typos completely blindly (except maybe "QWERTY" because uppercaps don't get autocorrected).
Apple autocorrect has a tendency to replace technical terms with similar words, eg. rvm turns into rum or ram or something. It's even worse on the watch somehow. I take care to hit every key exactly, the correct word is there, I hit space, boom replaced with a completely different word. On the watch it seems to replace almost every word with bullshit, not just technical terms.
> seems to replace almost every word with bullshit
Sort of related, it also doesn't let you cuss. It will insist on replacing fuck with pretty much anything else. I had to add fuck to the custom replacement dictionary so it would let me be. What language I choose to use is mine and mine alone, I don't want Nanny to clean it up.