Rumour is a release on the 22nd I believe
It's based on leaked p photo of a deck.
Pretty sure everyone said that's an old date and that's no longer the timeline but hopefully that's just misinformation and we'll get it on the 22nd.
Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
201–210 of 280 posts
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#202There are a lot more of these Gemini 3 examples out on twitter right now. After seeing them, I bought Google stock. What shocks me about its output is it actually feels like it's producing net new creative designs, not just regurgitated template output. Its extremely hard to design in code in a way that produces consistent, beautiful output, but it seems to be achieving it. That combined with Google being the only on…
I'm no financial advisor but I can tell you that it's not a financially sound decision to buy stock based off of speculative hype Twitter posts. But you do you if you have "fun money" to throw around!
I agree, though the time to buy was 6 months ago when everyone hated the stock. I think it can still appreciate nicely in the coming 1-3 years, search isn't really going anywhere and their other pieces (Youtube, Cloud, A.I subscriptions) will do good. If this bull market continues 4 trillion market cap is reasonable.
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#203The sentiment in this thread surprises me a great deal. For me, Gemini 2.5 Pro is markedly worse than GPT-5 Thinking along every axis of hallucinations, rigidity in its self-assured correctness and sycophancy. Claude Opus used to be marginally better but now Claude Sonnet 4.5 is far better, although not quite on par with GPT-5 Thinking. I frequently ask the same question side-by-side to all 3 and the only situation i…
This has been pretty much exactly my experience.
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#204I might be in the minority here but I've consistently found Gemini to be better than ChatGPT, Claude and Deepseek (I get access to all of the pro models through work) Maybe it's just the kind of work I'm doing, a lot of web development with html/scss, and Google has crawled the internet so they have more data to work with. I reckon different models are better at different kinds of work, but Gemini is pretty excellent…
I agree with you, I consistently find Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Claude and GPT-5 for the following cases: * Creative writing: Gemini is the unmatched winner here by a huge margin. I would personally go so far as to say Gemini 2.5 Pro is the only borderline kinda-sorta usable model for creative writing if you squint your eyes. I use it to criticize my creative writing (poetry, short stories) and no other model unders…
Ya their agent mode with it is terrible. Its set to auto stop after a specific point and it's not very long lol
Weird considering I've been hearing how they have way more compute than anyone
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#205My friends at Google hate AI coding with passion. I have some theories as to why. But anyone here venture a guess?
AI coding is in many ways antithetical to great software engineering.
It is the current spear-edge of the investor pressure to ship products faster, and monetize users more aggressively, all at the cost of quality, reliability, ethics, security.
If you, as a software engineer, once held an ideal about programming as an art or craft, AI coding flies in the face of all that.
It turns out that maximising for short-term profit leaves many other objectives behind in its wake.
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you, I consistently find Gemini 2.5 Pro better than Claude and GPT-5 for the following cases: * Creative writing: Gemini is the unmatched winner here by a huge margin. I would personally go so far as to say Gemini 2.5 Pro is the only borderline kinda-sorta usable model for creative writing if you squint your eyes. I use it to criticize my creative writing (poetry, short stories) and no other model unders…
The best model for creative writing is still Deepseek because I can tune temperature to the edge of gibberish for better raw material as that gives me bizarre words. Most models use top_k or top_p or I can't use the full temperature range to promote truly creative word choices. e.g. I asked it to reply to your comment: Oh magnificent, another soul quantifying the relative merits of these digital gods while I languish…
Celan is great, get his collected poems translated by Michael Hamburger and check out Die Engführung.
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more like buying a medal vs winning one in a marathon. Depending on your goal, they are either very different or the exact same
If your goal is to prove what an awesome writer you are, sure, avoid AI. If your goal is to just get something done and off your plate, have the AI do it. If your goal is to create something great, give your vision the best possible expression - use the AI judiciously to explore your ideas, to suggest possibilities, to teach you as it learns from you.
AI/non-AI/human/hybrid: It doesn't matter which one is the writer.
It's the reader who decides how good the writing is.
The joy which the writer gets by being creative is of no consequence to the reader. Sacrifice of this joy to adopt emerging systems is immaterial.
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#208I don't understand all the hype for generating SVG with LLM. The task is not really useful, doesn't seem that interesting in single shot as it's really hard, and no human could do it (it would be more useful if the model has visual feedback and could correct the result).
And also, since it becomes a popular task, companies will add the examples in their training set, so you're just benchmarking who has the better text to SVG training set, not the overall quality of the model.
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#209I might be in the minority here but I've consistently found Gemini to be better than ChatGPT, Claude and Deepseek (I get access to all of the pro models through work) Maybe it's just the kind of work I'm doing, a lot of web development with html/scss, and Google has crawled the internet so they have more data to work with. I reckon different models are better at different kinds of work, but Gemini is pretty excellent…
you're not in the minority, there's just intense fanboyism on Hacker News to promote OpenAI, because it serves the whole "LLM revolution" schtick better
Gemini has been dominating the field for about a year now, but I suppose Google is bit boring cause they just do things well
Re: Gemini 3.0 spotted in the wild through A/B testing
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI Codex currently seems quite a lot better than Gemini 2.5 and marginally better than Claude. I'm using all three back-to-back via the VS Code plugins (which I believe are equivalent to the CLI tools). I can live with either OpenAI Codex or Claude. Gemini 2.5 is useful but it is consistently not quite as good as the other two. I agree that for non-Agentic coding tasks Gemini 2.5 is really good though.
Since I have only used Gemini Pro 2.5 (free) and Claude on the web (free) and I am thinking of subbing to one service or two, are you saying that: - Gemini Pro 2.5 is better at feeding it more code and ask it to do a task (or more than one)? - ...but that GPT Codex and Claude Code are better at iterating on a project? - ...or something else? I am looking to gauge my options. Will be grateful for your shared experienc…
Codex and Claude are better than Gemini in all coding tasks I've tried.
At the "smart autocomplete" level the distinction isn't large but it gets bigger the more agentic you ask for.