Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 151 posts

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#121

Post by JeremyNT »

lacker wrote: post #76
RhodesianHunter wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if they're pulling the wall-mart model. Ruthlessly cut costs and sell at-or-below costs until your competitors go out of business, then ratchet up the prices once you have market dominance.

Probably not. Do they really believe they are going to knock OpenAI out of business, when the OpenAI models are better? Instead I think they are going after the "Android model". Recognize they might not be able to dethrone the leader who invented the space. Define yourself in the marketplace as the cheaper alternative. "Less good but almost as good." In the end, they hope to be one of a small number of surviving memb…

> Probably not. Do they really believe they are going to knock OpenAI out of business, when the OpenAI models are better?

Would OpenAI even exist without Google publishing their research? The idea that Google is some kind of also-ran playing catch up here feels kind of wrong to me.

Sure OpenAI gave us the first productized chatbots, so in that sense they "invented the space," but it's not like Google were over there twiddling their thumbs - they just weren't exposing their models directly outside of Google.

I think we're past the point where any of these tech giants have some kind of moat (other than hardware, but you have to assume that Google is at least at parity with OpenAI/MS there).

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#122

Post by screye »

arresin wrote: post #93

I’ve used it. The API is incredibly buggy and flakey. A particular pain point is the “recitation error” fiasco. If you’re developing a real world app this basically makes the Gemini api unusable. It strikes me as a kind of “Potemkin” service. Google is aware of the issue and it has been open on google's bug tracker since March 2024: https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/331677495 There is also discussion on GitHub:…

The recitation error is a big deal.

I was ready to champion gemini use across my organization, and the recitation issue curbed any enthusiasm I had. It's opaque and Google has yet to suggest a mitigation.

Your comment is not hyperbole. It's a genuine expression of how angry many customers are.

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#123

Post by jsnell »

hadlock wrote: post #119
Workaccount2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are going for large corporate customers. They are a brand name with deep pockets and a pretty risk-adverse model. So even if Gemini sucks, they'll still win over execs being pushed to make a decision.

Not even trying to be snarky, but their lack of ability to offer products for more than a handful of years, does not lend google towards being chosen by large corporate customers. I know a guy who works in cloud sales and his government customers are PISSED they are sunsetting one of their PDF products and are being forced to migrate that process. The customer was expecting that to work for 10+ years and after a ~3 y…

What Google Cloud pdf product is that? I thought my knowledge of discontinued Google products was near-encyclopedic, but this is the first I've heard of that.

But as an enterprise customer, if you expect X, don't you get X into the contract?

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#124

Post by elashri »

CSMastermind wrote: post #82
ancorevard wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the most important update. Pricing and speed doesn't matter when your call fails because of "safety".

Also Google's safety filters are absolutely awful. Beyond parody levels of bad. This is a query I did recently that got rejected for "safety" reasons: Who are the current NFL starting QBs? Controversial I know, I'm surprised I'd be willing to take the risk with submitting such a dangerous query to the model.

Not stranger than my experience with openai. I got banned from DELL-3 access when it first came because I asked in the prompt about generating a particle moving in magnetic field of a forward direction and decays to two other particles with a kink angle between the particle and the charged daughter.

I don't recall exact prompt but it should be something close to that. I really wonder what filters they had about kink tracks and why? Do they have a problem with Beyond standard model searches /s.

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#125

Post by rty32 »

ramshanker wrote: post #97

One company buying expensive NVIDIA hardware vs another using in-house chips. Google got a huge advantage here. They could really undercut OpenAI.

People have said that for many years. Very few companies are choosing Google's TPUs. Everyone wants H100s.

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#127

Post by mil22 »

imp0cat wrote: post #110
mil22 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have used Github Copilot extensively within VS Code for several months. The autocomplete - fast and often surprisingly accurate - is very useful. My only complaint is when writing comments, I find the completions distracting to my thought process. I tried Gemini Code Assist and it was so bad by comparison that I turned it off within literally minutes. Too slow and inaccurate. I also tried Codestral via the Continue…

Have you tried Gitlab Duo and if so, what are your thoughts on that?

Not yet, hadn't heard of it. Thanks for the suggestion.

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#128

Post by panarky »

naiv wrote: post #35

This sounds interesting: "We will continue to offer a suite of safety filters that developers may apply to Google’s models. For the models released today, the filters will not be applied by default so that developers can determine the configuration best suited for their use case."

The "safety" filters used to make Gemini models nearly unusable.

For example, this prompt was apparently unsafe: "Summarize the conclusions of reputable econometric models that estimate the portion of import tariffs that are absorbed by the exporting nation or company, and what portion of import tariffs are passed through to the importing company or consumers in the importing nation. Distinguish between industrial commodities like steel and concrete from consumer products like apparel and electronics. Based on the evidence, estimate the portion of tariffs passed through to the importing company or nation for each type of product."

I can confirm that this prompt is no longer being filtered which is a huge win given these new lower token prices!

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#129

Post by CSMastermind »

elashri wrote: post #124
CSMastermind wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also Google's safety filters are absolutely awful. Beyond parody levels of bad. This is a query I did recently that got rejected for "safety" reasons: Who are the current NFL starting QBs? Controversial I know, I'm surprised I'd be willing to take the risk with submitting such a dangerous query to the model.

Not stranger than my experience with openai. I got banned from DELL-3 access when it first came because I asked in the prompt about generating a particle moving in magnetic field of a forward direction and decays to two other particles with a kink angle between the particle and the charged daughter. I don't recall exact prompt but it should be something close to that. I really wonder what filters they had about kink…

For what it's worth I run every query I make through all the major models and Google's censorship is the only one I consistently hit.

I think I bumped into Anthropics once? And I know I hit ChatGPTs a few months back but I don't even remember what the issue was.

I hit Google's safety blocks at least a few times a week during the course of my regular work. It's actually crazy to me that they allowed someone to ship these restrictions.

They must either think they will win the market no matter the product quality or just not care about winning it.

Re: Two new Gemini models, reduced 1.5 Pro pricing, increased rate limits, and more

#130

Post by 999900000999 »

caseyy wrote: post #103
999900000999 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm open to being wrong. However for many industries your still running the risk of leaking data via a 3rd party service. You can run Llama3 on prem, which eliminates that risk. I try to reduce reliance on 3rd party services when possible. I still have PTSD from Saucelabs constantly going down and my manager berating me over it.

You are not technically wrong because a statement "there is a risk of leaking data" is not falsifiable. But your comment is performative cynicism to display your own high standards. For the very vast majority of people and companies, privacy standards-compliant services (like HIPAA-compliant) are private enough.

I know my company outright warns us to not share any sensitive information with LLMs, including ones that claim to not use customer data for training.

I can flip your statement around. For the vast majority of use cases, LLAMA 3 can be hosted on prem and will have similar performance.

Post reply on HN