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

Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 616 posts

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#221

Post by Havoc »

armarr wrote: post #89
m_w_ wrote: post #13

It's a bit disheartening to see no comparison to other models here - and I'm not sure this pushes the curve anywhere. 3.6 flash is more expensive than GLM 5.2 - but seemingly worse, although this post is really light (lite?) on details. It seemed for a time that Google had finally gotten the ball rolling, but I'm doubting that more and more as time passes. We'll see what happens with 3.5 pro I suppose.

GLM was twice as verbose running the Artificial Analysis benchmark. So it ends up being more expensive

>verbose

GLM defaults to max effort btw

https://docs.together.ai/docs/glm-5.2-quickstart#reasoning-e...

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#222

Post by furkansahin »

GodelNumbering wrote: post #151
stonewhite wrote: post #90

Google somehow managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of success with their AI products. They literally forced me and my company out of Antigravity by phasing out AI Ultra subscription without any proper product follow-up. Antigravity IDE cannot even have poweruser subscriptions now from Google Workspace an Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform cannot be attached to Antigravity IDE. Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform has an…

> I was a big proponent of Google and Gemini, but they left us reeling with their abrupt product decisions. Likewise. This seems like a common feel. I have at least spent $4000 and likely a lot more on Gemini API because I really wanted them to win. I gave up.

I am going to ask a very direct question and only because I am curious.

Why do you care? Why would you spend your own money to a multi trillion dollar company so that they win their own "war" against another multi trillion dollar company?

Please don't get me wrong, I know the question can seem a bit negative, I am really just curious.

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#223

Post by sdesol »

Eridrus wrote: post #213
xnx wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google somehow managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of success This is still very early days. Who is "on top" has flipped back and forth many times already. The next frontier model release (from whomever) will change things again.

I don't think it's that early tbh, agentic coding has ~90% adoption in the US. Claude Code has largely won individual developer mindshare and has been on top ever since it came out. The benchmarks change, but almost nobody opts to use anything other than Claude IME when I ask them. Enterprise is more competitive since they care about costs and other things, but developers leaning towards Claude puts a thumb on the sc…

> Claude Code has largely won individual developer mindshare and has been on top ever since it came out.

Claude Code's success is not due to the agent but because the model is considered the best for programming and is very heavily subsidized, compared to pay as you go API prices. Consumers and Enterprise are not really locked in and will go where it makes the most sense.

I think they have almost no loyalty by actual developers.

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#225

Post by thebigspacefuck »

XCSme wrote: post #126

I was expecting 3.6 Pro. It's been so long since the last Pro model...

They are working on coming up with a better code name. You know, something like ”Fable” or ”Sol”, gotta have one these days. Personally I think they should go with “Mafia”. How cool would that sound? 3.6 Mafia.

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#226

Post by anthonypasq »

postalcoder wrote: post #53

I wonder how big the Pro model is that Google is using behind the scenes to train these smaller ones. Going on baseless speculation, the lack of accompanying pro models with these flash releases either means: 1) the model is too big to be economical, 2) google doesn't have the compute to serve the big model, 3) their big model has too many alignment issues to serve to the public. edit: looks like benchmarks are up on…

Logan Kilpatrick said on an interview not too long ago that flash 3 and 3.5 are the same pre-train. all gains on top of 3 flash are post-training

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#227

Post by simonw »

hypfer wrote: post #218
simonw wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did hit a nerve. I don't like being accused of posting comments here for "low effort personal brand promotion" or nefarious financial motives.

Well, yeah. No one does. But, also, as said, you're an industry (and foss!) veteran, so I find it impossible to believe that you haven't had your fair share of baseless bullshit being thrown at you, and with that, you gaining a persona that will not be hit by that, because it clearly knows that it is in fact bullshit. Unless of course it doesn't really know that with certainty. As said, I would _love_ to give you the…

I'm a professional blogger now. I still also work on open source software. I'm even fine being called an "influencer" (shudder), but I take offense to accusations of unethical behavior.

I think very hard about the ethics of what I'm doing and how I can best use my "platform" (shudder again) in as constructive a way as possible.

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#228

Post by anthonypasq »

viccis wrote: post #209
swe_dima wrote: post #69

It's scary relying on Google's models. I have a very price sensitive workload that used to run on flash 2.5 lite - it's deprecated now. The replacement 3.1 flash lite is a lot more expensive, but now also has a sunset date. 3.5 flash lite is even more expensive. So the price is rising and you have no choice but to keep paying more and more.

>So the price is rising and you have no choice but to keep paying more and more. You can also just write code like you did a year or two ago.

[flagged]

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#229

Post by squidbeak »

rednb wrote: post #79
simonw wrote: post #71

Pelicans for 3.6 Flash and 3.5 Flash-Lite (Cyber isn't available to me through the API yet.) https://tools.simonwillison.net/markdown-svg-renderer#url=ht...

I am growing tired of these pelicans posts every time a new model is published. Feels to me like low effort personal brand promotion. Just sharing my 2 cents.

Disagree. They're a nice tradition, but besides that, they're a useful way of eyeballing improvements. I realise labs are likely to be training for Pelicans - but if they're all training for them, the differences in the results are as indicative as they were before labs trained for them.

The 3.6 Flash pelican is just about the best I've seen.

Re: Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash-Lite, and 3.5 Flash Cyber

#230

Post by underdeserver »

hypfer wrote: post #218
simonw wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did hit a nerve. I don't like being accused of posting comments here for "low effort personal brand promotion" or nefarious financial motives.

Well, yeah. No one does. But, also, as said, you're an industry (and foss!) veteran, so I find it impossible to believe that you haven't had your fair share of baseless bullshit being thrown at you, and with that, you gaining a persona that will not be hit by that, because it clearly knows that it is in fact bullshit. Unless of course it doesn't really know that with certainty. As said, I would _love_ to give you the…

What do you want from him, seriously? Anyone who follows the scene knows that blogging about AI (and participating in conferences etc.) is what Simon does nowadays.

There's nothing shady here. The disclosure is front and center on his About page on his website.

He's not spamming you. It's one short link, sometimes a link to a first-impressions post. It's interesting and useful for me and the other commenters who keep upvoting his comments. Why are you so antagonistic?

Post reply on HN