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

Improved Gemini 2.5 Flash and Flash-Lite

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–285 of 285 posts

Re: Improved Gemini 2.5 Flash and Flash-Lite

#281

Post by manquer »

dgacmu wrote: post #255
manquer wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want role over then you could specify ^2.5.0 or 2.5.x if you want to pin then it would be 2.5.0 This is all solved for a long time now , llm vendors seems to have unlearnt versioning principles. This is fairly typical - marketing and business wants different things to do with version number than what version number systems are good at .

I suspect Google doesn't want to have to maintain multiple sub-versions. It's easier to serve one 2x popular model than two models where there's flux between the load on each, since these things have a non-trivial time to load into GPU/TPU memory for serving.

Even if switching quickly was a challenge[1], they are using these models in their own products not just selling them in a service, the first party applications could quite easily adapt to this by switching quickly to the available model and freeing up the in-demand one.

This is the entire premise behind the cloud, the reason it was Amazon did it first, they had the largest workloads at the time before Web 2.0 and SaaS was a thing.

Only businesses with large first party apps succeeded in the cloud provider space, companies like HP, IBM all failed and their time to failure strongly correlated to their amount of first party apps they operated. i.e. These apps anyway needed to keep a lot of idle capacity for peak demand capacity they could now monetize and co-mingle in the cloud.

LLMs as a service is not any different from S3 launched 20 years ago.

---

[1] It isn't, at the scale they are operating these models it shouldn't matter at all, it is not individual GPUs or machines that make a difference in load handling at all. Only few users are going to explicitly pining a specific patch version for the rest they can serve either one that is available immediately or cheaply.

Re: Improved Gemini 2.5 Flash and Flash-Lite

#282

Post by scosman »

CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #250
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am seeing a lot of demand for something like a semver for AI models. Could thereotically there could be something like a semver that can be autogenerated from that defined and regular version scheme that you shared? Like, Honestly my idea of it is that I could use something like openrouter and then just change the semver without having to worry about these soooo many things as the schema that you shared y'know? A w…

I'm not sure if this is a joke or not, but in case it isn't: Semver was mostly created so users of libraries could judge if a new release would break the API interfaces or not, by just looking at the version. So unless the first number changed, you're good to go (in theory, in practice this obviously didn't work as expected). With that in mind, what exactly would semver (or similar) represent for AI models? Setup the…

Models have changes worthy of semver style major changes. Tokenizer, tool support, tool format, JSON modes, etc. Pipelines absolutely must change when these change.

This thread is more about the minor number: not incrementing it when making changes to the internals is painful for dependency tracking. These changes will also break apps (prompts are often tuned to the model).

Re: Improved Gemini 2.5 Flash and Flash-Lite

#284

Post by shijithpk »

behnamoh wrote: post #209
nico wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another issue: Gemini can’t do tool calling and (forced) json output at the same time If you want to use application/json as the specified output in the request, you can’t use tools So if you need both, you either hope it gives you correct json when using tools (which many times it doesn’t). Or you have to do two requests, one for the tool calling, another for formatting At least, even if annoying, this issue is pret…

Does any other provider allow that? what use cases are there for JSON + tool calling at the same time?

Suppose there's a pdf with lots of tables i want to scrape. I mention the pdf url in my message and with gemini's url context tool, i now have access to the pdf.

I can ask gemini to give me the pdf's content as a json and it complies most of the time. But at times, there's an introductory line like "Here's your json:". Those introductory lines interfere with programmatically using the output. They're sometimes there, sometimes not.

If I could have structured output at the same time as tool use, I can reliably use what gemini spits out as it'll be in a json, no annoying intro lines.

Re: Improved Gemini 2.5 Flash and Flash-Lite

#285

Post by qnleigh »

davidmckayv wrote: post #53

This really captures something I've been experiencing with Gemini lately. The models are genuinely capable when they work properly, but there's this persistent truncation issue that makes them unreliable in practice. I've been running into it consistently, responses that just stop mid-sentence, not because of token limits or content filters, but what appears to be a bug in how the model signals completion. It's been…

What happens if you ask it to please continue? Does it start over?
Post reply on HN