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

Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 512 posts

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#101

Post by monkmartinez »

srameshc wrote: post #82
losvedir wrote: post #74

This naming is confusing... Anyway, I'm glad that this Google release is actually available right away! I pay for Gemini Advanced and I see "Gemini Flash 2.0" as an option in the model selector. I've been going through Advent of Code this year, and testing each problem with each model (GPT-4o, o1, o1 Pro, Claude Sonnet, Opus, Gemini Pro 1.5). Gemini has done decent, but is probably the weakest of the bunch. It failed…

I use a Claude and Gemini a lot for coding and I realized there is no good or best model. Every model has it's upside and downside. I was trying to get authentication working according to the newer guidelines of Manifest V3 for browser extensions and every model is terrible. It is one use case where there is not much information or right documentation so every model makesup stuff. But this is my experience and I don'…

This is true for all newish code bases. You need to provide the context it needs to get the problem right. It has been my experience that one or two examples with new functions or new requirements will suffice for a correction.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#102

Post by manishsharan »

siliconc0w wrote: post #44

What's everyone's favorite LLM leaderboard? Gemini 2 seems to be edging out 4o on chatbot arena( https://lmarena.ai/?leaderboard )

Leaderboards are not that useful for measuring real-life effectiveness of the models atleast in my day-today usage.

I am currently struggling to diagnose an ipv6 mis-configuration in my enormous aws cloudformation yaml code. I gave the same input to Claude Opus, Gemini and ChatGPT ( o1 and 4o).

4o was the worst. verbose and waste of my time.

Claude completely went off-tangent and began recommending fixes for ipv4 while I specifically asked for ipv6 issues

o1 made a suggestion which I tried out and it fixed it. It literally found a needle in the haystack. The solution is working well now.

Gemini made a suggestion which almost got it right but it was not a full solution.

I must clarify diagnosing network issues on AWS VPC is not my expertise and I use the LLMs to supplement my knowledge.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#103

Post by mupuff1234 »

dagmx wrote: post #91
mupuff1234 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They pay to run it locally as well (more expensive hardware) And sure, poor reception will be an issue, but most people would still absolutely take a helpful remote assistant over a dumb local assistant. And you don't exactly see people complaining that they can't run Google/YouTube/etc locally.

Your first sentence has the fallacy that you’re attributing the cost of the device to a single feature against the cost of that single feature. Most people are unlikely to buy the device for the AI features alone. It’s a value add to the device they’d buy anyway. So you need the paid for option to be significantly better than the free one that comes with the device. Your second sentence assumes the local one is dumb.…

I think it's a more likely assumption that on device performance will trail off device models by a significant margin for at least the next few years - of course if magically you can make it work locally with the same level of performance it would be better.

Plus a lot of the "agentic" stuff is interaction with the outside world, connectivity is a must regardless.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#104

Post by dagmx »

whimsicalism wrote: post #90
dagmx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what point does the on device stuff eat into their market share though? As on device gets better, who will pay for cloud compute? Other than enterprise use. I’m not saying on device will ever truly compete at quality, but I believe it’ll be good enough that most people don’t care to pay for cloud services.

You're still focused about inference :) inference basically does not matter, it is a commodity

You’re still focused about training :)

training doesn’t matter if inference costs are high and people don’t pay for them

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#105

Post by ramoz »

nightski wrote: post #79

Anyone else annoyed how the ML/AI community just adopted the word "reasoning" when it seems like it is being used very out of context when looking at what the model actually does?

These models take an instruction, along with any contextual information, and are trained to produce valid output.

That production of output is a form of reasoning via _some_ type of logical processing. No?

Maybe better to say computational reasoning. That’s a mouthful.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#106

Post by vineyardmike »

whimsicalism wrote: post #20
dagmx wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding TPU’s, sure for the stuff that’s running on the cloud. However their on device TPUs lag behind the competition and Google still seem to struggle to move significant parts of Gemini to run on device as a result. Of course, Gemini is provided as a subscription service as well so perhaps they’re not incentivized to move things locally. I am curious if they’ll introduce something like Apple’s private cloud comp…

i don’t think they need to win the on device market. we need to separate inference and training - the real winners are those who have the training compute. you can always have other companies help with inference

I don’t think the AI market will ever really be a healthy one until inference vastly outnumbers training. What does it say about AI if training is done more than inference?

I agree that the in-device inference market is not important yet.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#107

Post by dagmx »

mupuff1234 wrote: post #103
dagmx wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first sentence has the fallacy that you’re attributing the cost of the device to a single feature against the cost of that single feature. Most people are unlikely to buy the device for the AI features alone. It’s a value add to the device they’d buy anyway. So you need the paid for option to be significantly better than the free one that comes with the device. Your second sentence assumes the local one is dumb.…

I think it's a more likely assumption that on device performance will trail off device models by a significant margin for at least the next few years - of course if magically you can make it work locally with the same level of performance it would be better. Plus a lot of the "agentic" stuff is interaction with the outside world, connectivity is a must regardless.

My point is that you do NOT need the same level of performance. You need an adequate level of performance that the cost to get more performance isn’t worth it to most people.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#108

Post by discobot »

summerlight wrote: post #83

It is interesting to see that they keep focusing on the cheapest model instead of the frontier model. Probably because of their primary (internal?) customer's need?

the problem is that last generation of the largest models failed to overcome smaller models on the benchmarks, see lack of new claude opus or gpt-5. The problem is probably in the benchmarks, but anyway.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#109

Post by nycdatasci »

Gemini 2.0 Flash is available here: https://aistudio.google.com/prompts/new_chat

Based on initial interactions, it's extremely verbose. It seems to be focused on explaining its reasoning, but even after just a few interactions I have seen some surprising hallucinations. For example, to assess current understanding of AI, I mentioned "Why hasn't Anthropic released Claude 3.5 Opus yet?" Gemini responded with text that included "Why haven't they released Claude 3.5 Sonnet First? That's an interesting point." There's clearly some reflection/attempted reasoning happening, but it doesn't feel competitive with o1 or the new Claude 3.5 Sonnet that was trained on 3.5 Opus output.

Re: Gemini 2.0: our new AI model for the agentic era

#110

Post by Jabrov »

jncfhnb wrote: post #17
famouswaffles wrote: post #2

The Gemini 2 models support native audio and image generation but the latter won't be generally available till January. Really excited for that as well as 4o's image generation (whenever that comes out). Steerability has lagged behind aesthetics in image generation for a while now and it's be great to see a big advance in that. Also a whole lot of computer vision tasks (via LLMs) could be unlocked with this. Think In…

These are not computer vision tasks…

What are they, then…?
Post reply on HN