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

Gemini 3.7 Flash

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 525 posts

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#461

Post by iainmerrick »

bayindirh wrote: post #233
jjcm wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other thoughts: I really think Google has fallen behind here. Even as a high speed offering (this build took ~7min, which is pretty good!), it wont be able to claim dominance for long with cerebras announcing the Sol preview today: https://www.cerebras.ai/blog/accelerating-gpt-5-6-sol-ultraf... . It's not a bad model by any means, but I just don't know what situation I'd reach for 3.7 Flash first for. Google really n…

I use LLMs rarely, and only for digging into subjects which I can't find enough information using search engines. I only tried Claude and Gemini, but Gemini both returns faster and higher quality information which I can use for more targeted digging myself. Google being Google, their models tend to be better at finding, organizing and presenting information, from my experience.

Yep, I use Gemini for this too and it’s great - very fast and high quality.

I’d be very willing to try it out as an API, but it’s far too complicated to set up payment, and I don’t want to risk taking a wrong step and being locked out of other Google services. So Anthropic and Mistral get my money instead.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#462

Post by FartyMcFarter »

ikiris wrote: post #394
deaux wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sergey's out spending $100 million to lobby against the billionaire tax in California. Lest his net worth shrink from roughly $250 billion to $237 billion. Can't become a pleb now! [0] [0] https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/10/google-co-founder-sergey-b...

not that I'm intending to defend Sergey here but, if you could spend 0.04% of your net worth to protect 5% of your net worth (and probably all of your easy liquidity)... wouldn't you?

> if you could spend 0.04% of your net worth to protect 5% of your net worth

If I was anywhere near being a billionaire I wouldn't. There would be much better things to spend my time and effort on. That's not even counting the fact that I would probably care about the ethical aspect too.

0.95x of an obscene amount of money I can't spend is still an obscene amount of money I can't spend. That 5% wouldn't make any discernible difference in my life.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#463

Post by surgical_fire »

surajrmal wrote: post #383
surgical_fire wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google was cash-flow negative in Q2 2026, and is raising a lot of debt. I am not sure they can afford to subsidize Gemini more than they already do.

Notably that's not due to subsidization but rather due to investment in capex for future growth. The reason to not subsidize is largely because of already being hardware constrained. There is no extra unsold capacity to use.

> investment in capex for future growth

Future growth needs to materialize for this to be profitable. Right now what they have is a cash-flow negative reality.

> There is no extra unsold capacity to use.

I have no evidence of this.

Neither I have evidence that they would be in the position of subsidizing further AI usage.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#464

Post by ethbr1 »

solfox wrote: post #267
jjcm wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer that I haven't tried this since January, so things may have changed in the last 7mo, but this was my experience at that time: https://x.com/pwnies/status/2010523020629274723 At a high level though, as a rule of thumb Google assumes that they're serving companies at Google scale first, and at a human scale second. For other companies it's the opposite. Generally what that means is the first experience you g…

> they're serving companies at Google scale first I think that's actually a very interesting insight that would be helpful for PMs on GCloud to take note of. As a single founder, setting up Google Cloud, it's like they start out by assuming you're bigco, forcing (I assume most) of their users into a arduous process of removing components they don't need. Google AI Studio is one of Google's solutions to this problem,…

> As a single founder, setting up Google Cloud, it's like they start out by assuming you're bigco

My impression of anything enterprise (big or small) related to Google is that they just don't care / value solving it.

Which is sad, because "How does an enterprise customer pay for X?" is a non-trivial and incredibly important UX problem.

They have great technical solutions, but these are hamstrung by a frankly amateur understanding of how companies (startups to Fortune 500s) need to sign up, pay for, and track things.

From an outside perspective, one of the biggest gaps seems to be that internal Google product teams don't have to dogfood the full GCP et al. project/org experience. They get prebuilt billing structures (or just get to avoid them with internal cross-billing).

---

If I could waive a magic wand, Google would appoint an "Enterprise Czar", reporting directly to Pichai, who is a non-technical, retired founder / CEO.

That person would have one job: try to sign up, run (their team), and budget strategic Google initiatives (like AI) as a blind external party.

They would then deliver continuous reports to Pichai about how hard / easy this is.

Because potential Google customers don't give a shit if it's this internal team or that internal team's responsibility for integrating New Product X into GCP billing.

They care that the experience is terrible, filled with friction, and often flat out doesn't work.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#465

Post by mchusma »

aurareturn wrote: post #362
mchusma wrote: post #361

This is a solid release (at the intro pricing, the other pricing is dumb). I do think its a missed opportunity to really blow things out of the water and have this be another 1/2 off, but clearly they don't have the inference efficiency for it. Speed is good, the knowledge in google's models is solid for those usecases, price is reasonable (after 3.5/3.6 major missteps). The intelligence index vs cost pareto frontier…

Probably golden age for competition before consolidation.

Maybe? But GLM just put itself on the pareto today again, so its up to 10. The theory was that there would be recursive self improvement in models, leading to a 1 or a handful of entities running away from the rest. But basically the opposite happened? Different teams, different hardware stacks. What do we make of this? (1) There must not really be any deep secrets/moats right now? (2) improving models is not something you can throw only intelligence at now?

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#466

Post by the_bigfatpanda »

krat0sprakhar wrote: post #215
jjcm wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other thoughts: I really think Google has fallen behind here. Even as a high speed offering (this build took ~7min, which is pretty good!), it wont be able to claim dominance for long with cerebras announcing the Sol preview today: https://www.cerebras.ai/blog/accelerating-gpt-5-6-sol-ultraf... . It's not a bad model by any means, but I just don't know what situation I'd reach for 3.7 Flash first for. Google really n…

Can you help me understand how it is hard to get an API key from Google? You just head on over to http://aistudio.google.com/api-keys and create a key... not any different from platform.openai.com? Disclaimer: I work in Google so it might be that this link is not publicly well known

As someone who has been running Gemini models in production for a year, recently (last 2 months), I have been actively moving away from it.

The primary reason for me has been that Google autonomously decides to downgrade usage tiers and then upgrade them again - and does this incorrectly.

Over the last week itself, in the span of two days, our account for first downgraded and then upgraded. This is despite matching the criteria to remain at the tier we operate at throughout.

Google Support (when you finally get to a human) has accepted that these are potentially bugs, but the first time it happened, we were rate limited so severely for ~4 hours that I find it really difficult to continue trusting Google.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#467

Post by customguy »

instagraham wrote: post #426

Funnily enough, I just ran a task on AI Studio with 3.6 yesterday and got 3.7 to do a similar one today; so it serves as an interesting and quick comparisons between the old and the new (usually, if enough time passes between your use of one model and the next, you'll have a sourer view of it than its actual competence suggests). It hallucinated in both cases despite being given an API key and building a lot of pipes…

For me, it just shits the bed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49292924

Reading the google blog and these discussions makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills, seriously. Side-by-side comparisons with the exact same inputs or it didn't happen, that's my rule going forward. Test all the things, believe nothing.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#468

Post by sumedh »

Joeri wrote: post #182
ls_stats wrote: post #157

I don't get it, Google could heavily subsidy their Gemini models to make it more attractive, but they prefer to not do it. I don't know one soul who is using Gemini models to code. Even OpenAI who doesn't have money or capacity is offering their Luna model at $1.2 per 1M/out.

Why would they? Unless they have lots of unused tpu real estate that they could host it on “for free” they would be bumping more profitable workloads off of machines to give away that capacity to people with zero long term loyalty. There is no business reason for google to subsidize these models. OpenAI has too much money. They’re spending their money in stupid ways.

> OpenAI has too much money

I think they got some data center deals very cheap when no on was thinking about data centers. Dario didnt want to take that risk so Anthropic didnt make the deals earlier but now paying Google and Elon higher rates.

Re: Gemini 3.7 Flash

#469

Post by itsdesmond »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #439
jppittma wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that argument should stop with advocacy for law. I have no problem with this when it's means playing optimally within the current laws, things like hiring world class tax attorneys. But if using your immense wealth to ensure the rules that everyone plays by favor you specifically, instead of the country/world, It feels like this is closer to bribing a judge than hiring a tax attorney.

I would normally agree with that, but in this particular case "everyone" is just over 200 individuals. And he could be opposing it on principle as well. A one-off retroactive wealth tax is a rather questionable form of taxation even if (like myself) you are in favour of looking for ways to tax the super rich more effectively. When I read about these one-off wealth taxes I find one thing really astonishing. The argume…

> And he could be opposing it on principle as well.

I fucking bet.

Post reply on HN