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

151–160 of 616 posts

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

#151

Post by GodelNumbering »

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.

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

#153

Post by vlad_recomply »

Models are expensive and low performance. On top of that they make you jump through hoops to even use these models without being throttled even for the weaker models. The only reason we are using them is credits. As soon as credits run out we are switching immediately.

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

#154

Post by onion2k »

xnx wrote: post #145
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…

> 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 that's true if the reason a company has left the vendor for given model by making it hard to buy. Enterprise IT is enough of a pain in the butt that people will forego the new shiny to avoid the old painful unless it's genuinely better. As you say though, the best frontier model flips regularly, so companies won't go through the hassle of deploying a model if it's proved horrible to do in the past. They'll just skip that model because their current one is fine.

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

#155

Post by tacoooooooo »

hagen8 wrote: post #86
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.

Just switch the model, its not that much effort tbh. And u can also get a cheaper model than 2.5 lite for the same intelligence

its not always that simple. dropping in a new model is trivial, but highly specific workflows may rely on specific _invisible_ aspects of a model. when that model gets deprecated, the workflow needs to be rebuilt/re-tuned to work with a different model.

google's inability or unwillingness to provide stable timelines for model deprecation makes it risky to build complex workflows using their models

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

#156

Post by WASDx »

Alifatisk wrote: post #32
sosodev wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because AA Coding "Index" consists only of two benchmarks (Terminal-Bench v2.1, SciCode) and generally fails to be meaningfully representative of agentic coding capabilities.

Whats a better option for AA Coding Index?

DeepSWE and FrontierCode are more realistic if you read up on what they actually measure. But the most realistic is to try it yourself. Benchmarks can only vaguely represent typical usage, and how you judge the result. Giving the same real task you have to a few models will make you understand them better than chasing benchmarks.

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

#158

Post by mediaman »

Tenoke wrote: post #107
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…

It's also very possible that they know their big model underperforms chatgpt 5.6 and fable by too much, so they are focusing on what they can get wins in like speed instead.

There was some recent reporting that a July release of the Pro model got pushed back for exactly that reason. Its performance was not good compared to the OpenAI/Anthropic big models. They are having a lot of problems with posttrain.

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

#159

Post by bubble_niter »

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.

A new model arrives. The pelican, with uncanny commercial instinct, is never far behind.

Sponsored blogs and paid newsletters are after all, notoriously poor at subsisting on silence :)

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

#160

Post by stiltzkin »

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.

[dead]
Post reply on HN