Live data from Hacker News

Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

ankursethi.com

181–190 of 361 posts

Re: Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

#181
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kind of products hidden behind sales calls are generally the sort where the opinion of IC-level tech staff is next to irrelevant. With these kinds of products, the purchase decision is being made at a group level, the contract sizes are large, and budgetary approvals are required. It’s a snowball the size of a house, and it started rolling down the mountain months (or years) before it got to your desk. Literally…

I think this is true at larger organizations, but even a “small/medium” startup can easily sign contracts for single services for $100k+, and in my experience, salespeople really do care about commissions at those price points. A lot of software gets a foothold in an org by starting with the ICs, and individuals, not groups, are often the ones that request or approve software. Github and Slack are good examples of se…

> A lot of software gets a foothold in an org by starting with the ICs, and individuals, not groups, are often the ones that request or approve software.

Not really. Even if we keep the conversation in the realm of startups (which are not representative of anything other than chaos), ICs have essentially no ability to take unilateral financial risk. The Github “direct to developer” sales model worked for Github at that place and time, but even they make most of their money on custom contracts now.

You’re basically picking the (very) few services that are most likely to be acquired directly by end users. Slack is like an org-wide bike-shedding exercise, and Github is a developer tool. But once the org gets big enough, the contracts are all mediated by sales.

Outside of these few examples, SaaS software is almost universally sold to non-technical business leaders. Engineers have this weird, massive blind spot for the importance of sales, even if their own paycheck depends on it.

Re: Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

#182
Unfortunately Google's problem is the product is dictated by the architecture of the APIs and this is an issue for anything they do. At one point long ago every Google product was disjointed and Larry Page told everyone they needed to be unified under a single theme and login. Then over time with the scale of the company you become entirely dependent on the current workflows. To work around it, all of a sudden there's a new UI for a new product and it looks super clean right until you try do something with that login or roles or an API key that has to effectively jailbreak the flow you're in. Painful. It's why startups win. Small, nimble, none of that legacy cruft to deal with. Whoever is working hard to fix these problems at Google KUDOS TO YOU because it's not easy. It's not easy to wrangle these systems across hundreds of teams, products and infrastructure. The unification and seamless workflow at that scale is painfully hard to achieve and the issue is entirely about operating within the limitations of the system but for good reason.

I hope they figure out a lot of the issues but at the same time, I hope Gemini just disappears back into products rather than being at the forefront, because I think that's when Google does it's best work.

Re: Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

#183
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other side of the equation: I remember learning C++ with something like valgrind. I would write stupid code, validate, fix stupid issues. Others before me learned the harder way. With LLMs right now I'm learning frontend by just generating the UIs I want. I'm getting the code/mocks and experimenting. It's bad code, i will need to adjust, but it helps immensely as a starting point same as valgrind helped in the past.…

I do not think that all LLMs are evil; they are valid tools, but it's not a hammer with meta glasses attached to render everything into a nail. I also find it very useful in certain situations - but not in all situations. Two more things. Bad code (in work, in reality, not in a hobby project) is rarely converted into good code. And the last one: in my twenty plus years of being a dev, this is the first year job offer…

> Bad code (in work, in reality, not in a hobby project) is rarely converted into good code

Most code everywhere is bad code. Nobody cares unfortunately.

> And the last one: in my twenty plus years of being a dev, this is the first year job offers simply just dried up.

Actions of the US gov have caused a recession.

It's hard to find jobs in that environment

Put the blame where it's due.

AI is an excuse.

No company is going to hire now because of that.

There is also heavy bloat of incompetent software developers that needs to be shed.

Edit: Side note of shedding incompetent people

At work, I have a budget for tools, in the past this was handed over to contractors (think accenture).

They would come back with estimates of 1+ months, multiple developers and a manager for something I could do in a week.

They would deliver very poor quality and I had no choice.

With LLMs I can do the same quality of work in 30 minutes, then clean it up for a day and have a much better tool.

That budget is now used for other things and probably will be cut due to economic uncertainty.

Re: Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

#185
post #182

Unfortunately Google's problem is the product is dictated by the architecture of the APIs and this is an issue for anything they do. At one point long ago every Google product was disjointed and Larry Page told everyone they needed to be unified under a single theme and login. Then over time with the scale of the company you become entirely dependent on the current workflows. To work around it, all of a sudden there'…

> The unification and seamless workflow at that scale is painfully hard to achieve

It does make you wonder, why not just be a lot smaller? It's not like most of these teams actually generate any revenue. It seems like a weird structural decision which maybe made sense when hoovering up available talent was its own defensive moat but now that strategy is no longer plausible should be rethought?

Re: Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

#188
post #28

I didn't even need to read the article to upvote, and doing so just confirmed my assumption that somebody finally wrote down their frustration with Gemini. My fucking god, how has Google not flagged the failure of onboarding devs like Claude / Codex? 3 days ago I was literally thinking, I want to throw 20$ to try out Gemini alongside my Claude and Codex subs. It took me a few minutes to realize its just not worth my…

I wanted to try Googles Image generation models, to compliment my Claude API sub. Holy Crap, I got about 45 minutes into setting up billing and just gave up and un-did everything. Hint: If you want to put a spending Limit on your google cloud account, its not trivial. I will say that Stability AI is similar to Claude, they will just let you buy credits and hit an API.

Had the same problem, wanted to use gemini but wanted to setup a speeding limit, turns out Google would prefer you to risk bankruptcy for a mistake, no spending limit available from what I understood, ended up going with openrouter and using gemini through them instead

Re: Getting a Gemini API key is an exercise in frustration

#190
post #182

Unfortunately Google's problem is the product is dictated by the architecture of the APIs and this is an issue for anything they do. At one point long ago every Google product was disjointed and Larry Page told everyone they needed to be unified under a single theme and login. Then over time with the scale of the company you become entirely dependent on the current workflows. To work around it, all of a sudden there'…

> The unification and seamless workflow at that scale is painfully hard to achieve It does make you wonder, why not just be a lot smaller? It's not like most of these teams actually generate any revenue. It seems like a weird structural decision which maybe made sense when hoovering up available talent was its own defensive moat but now that strategy is no longer plausible should be rethought?

And yet google generates around $1.9miljon revenue per employee per year. Which is a lot, almost as good as competitors.
Post reply on HN