Where do you see a list of which languages it supports?
Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
221–230 of 334 posts
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#222They should just give up at this point, it's just embarrassing to watch. As PrimeTime said; these are the guys that invented the 'T' in 'GPT', that deployed their first TPU in 2015, that is using billions on AI - and they are beaten by 300 people startup named Moonshot AI even. People are going to write books about this complete fumble.
Have you used Google search at all on the past few months? Every single search brings up a live chat prompt. They're serving fast AI to billions of users at huge scale everyday And they're making money doing it. Perhaps they don't have the best coding model right now (although 3.8 flash is arguably SOTA at some benchmarks), but is that the be-all and end-all of AI? Only coding matters?
> brings up a live chat prompt. They're serving fast AI to billions of users
Just because it shows up does not mean it is being used. I only click the feedback button to tell them how much I dislike their Ai summaries. They have removed that feedback button this week. Can't take the heat I suppose.
I've also never know anyone who finds them trustworthy nor heard someone say anything besides how they also dislike them
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s so annoying that everyone just points to the Artificial Analysis index (or even worse, Epoch AI, where part of the score is how good the AI is at chess) as a proxy for “how good” the model is.
Most people talking about Gemini quality do so by experience.
sounds vibes and bias laden
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s so annoying that everyone just points to the Artificial Analysis index (or even worse, Epoch AI, where part of the score is how good the AI is at chess) as a proxy for “how good” the model is.
Its 200-300 TPS. GPT is at 50-60. And its like 5% worse? Yeah that is a good tradeoff.
Are you watching/waiting on your agents? I care zero about t/sec, quality is far more important that quantity or latency, but they run in the background and I check in from time to time
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#225My Gemini app is still stuck at 3.5 Flash-lite and 3.6 Flash so I truly don't understand how Google rolls this stuff out. I don't use Gemini for anything serious so I'm not going to use the API, but it's my go-to for just searching basic information (replacing google search) because it's so darn fast.
Yeah still on 3.6 here too, this is like the 4th or 5th model Google has announced since they last gave me access to the latest. And I pay for pro too!
I'm on AI Pro and have had 3.8 since announcement day, both in the Android app and in Antigravity CLI.
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m wondering if they even see a coding agent as a valuable prize. It’s a competitive market in a race to the bottom economically, hard to establish consistent differentiation and virtually zero switching cost for customers. I think they’ve made a shrewd move in focusing on search integration and everyday users (Gemini app) vs software power users. They have their corner and nobody is really competing with them, plus…
OpenAI/Anthropic are being valued at 25/50% of Alphabet respectively in secondary markets. Maybe everybody is wrong about how valuable these companies will be, but atm it looks very dumb to not be competitive in coding.
Google is not being dumb or making some 4D strategic move by not going after coding capabilities.
Occam's Razor is overwhelmingly that they just don't have the organisational capability to capture this market. If they did then they absolutely would have.
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if it's a harness thing or a model thing at this point. I feel all coding models are quite capable for most tasks I want them to do. Most of the time I don't need what the bench tests and I'm not really giving them completely ambiguous tasks without any refinement. I only find marginal differences between models at this point and it almost feels like personality quirks in each model than anything.
When comparing OpenAI and Claude thats pretty much true, but not Gemini... And have you tried Antigravity? Yikes
I've used Antigravity as my main coding agent on one of my biggest projects for about a year. It's been great for me. (and I use Claude, Codex, Grok and Muse for all the other projects)
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#228Now Gemini can’t make a summary of a YouTube video on his own. I need to give it the transcript.
Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#229Re: Gemini 3.8 Live and 3.8 Live Extended Thinking
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you used Google search at all on the past few months? Every single search brings up a live chat prompt. They're serving fast AI to billions of users at huge scale everyday And they're making money doing it. Perhaps they don't have the best coding model right now (although 3.8 flash is arguably SOTA at some benchmarks), but is that the be-all and end-all of AI? Only coding matters?
> brings up a live chat prompt. They're serving fast AI to billions of users Just because it shows up does not mean it is being used. I only click the feedback button to tell them how much I dislike their Ai summaries. They have removed that feedback button this week. Can't take the heat I suppose. I've also never know anyone who finds them trustworthy nor heard someone say anything besides how they also dislike them
A lot of my friends will say "Well, the google AI says this" so they're using it, and maybe they don't trust the answers, but I think the thing is that they're using it.
"It's AI but anyway", seems to be a way to use it, but not promote that your using it?
There's a significant amount of people in my friend group who don't like "AI", but everyone seems to use what google's doing, even if they add the "the AI said this" disclaimer to it.
Even the people who don't like 'AI', will still reference the LLM output, which seems like they're just slow to accept it, I guess.