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

Google is winning on every AI front

thealgorithmicbridge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 851 posts

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#301

Post by JKCalhoun »

jcfrei wrote: post #298
tunaoftheland wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ads angle is an interesting one since that's what motivates most things that Google and Meta do. Their LLMs' context window size has been growing, and while this might the natural general progression with LLMs, for those 2 ads businesses there's pretty straight paths to using their LLMs for even more targeted ads. For example, with the recent Llama "herd" releases, the LLMs have surprisingly large context window…

The real threat to Google, Meta is that LLMs become so cheap that its trivial for a company like Apple to make them available for free and include all the latest links to good products. No more search required if each M chip powered device can give you up-to-date recommendations for any product/service query.

That is my fantasy, actually.

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#302

Post by a2128 »

levocardia wrote: post #51

Google is winning on every front except... marketing (Google has a chatbot?), trust (who knew the founding fathers were so diverse?), safety (where's the 2.5 Pro model card?), market share (fully one in ten internet users on the planet are weekly ChatGPT users), and, well, vibes (who's rooting for big G, exactly?). But I will admit, Gemini Pro 2.5 is a legit good model. So, hats off for that.

My experience with their software has been horrible. A friend was messing around with Gemini on my phone and said my name is John, and it automatically saved that to my saved info list and always called me John from then on. But when I ask it to forget this, it says it can't do that automatically and links me to the Saved Info page, which is a menu they didn't implement in the app so it opens a URL in my browser and asks me to sign into my Google account again. Then a little toast says "Something went wrong" and the saved info list is empty and broken. I tried reporting this issue half a year ago and it's still unresolved. Actually the only way I was ever able to get it to stop calling me John is to say "remember to forget my name is John" in some way that it adds that to the list instead of linking me to that broken page

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#303

Post by ghaff »

wkat4242 wrote: post #267
miohtama wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For comparison, Uber is still not profitable after 15 years or so. Give it some time.

I'm surprised. They pay the drivers a pittance. My ex drove Uber for a while and it wasn't really worth it. Also, for the customers it's usually more expensive and slower than a normal taxi at least here in Spain. The original idea of ride-sharing made sense but just like airbnb it became an industry and got enshittified.

My sense in London is that they’re pretty comparable. I’ll use whichever is more convenient.

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#304

Post by scrollop »

ramraj07 wrote: post #159
codelord wrote: post #31

As an Ex-OpenAI employee I agree with this. Most of the top ML talent at OpenAI already have left to either do their own thing or join other startups. A few are still there but I doubt if they'll be around in a year. The main successful product from OpenAI is the ChatGPT app, but there's a limit on how much you can charge people for subscription fees. I think soon people expect this service to be provided for free an…

I don't know what you did there, but clearly being ex OpenAI isn't the intellectual or product flex it is: I and every other smart person I know still use ChatGPT (paid) because even now it's the best at what it does and we keep trying Google and Claude and keep coming back. They got and as of now continue to get things right for the most part. If you still aren'ĥt seeing it maybe you should introspect what you're mi…

I use a service where users can choose any frontier model, and OpenAI models haven't been the most used model for over half a year - it was sonnet until gemini 2.5 pro came out, recently.

Not sure whether you have your perspective because you're invested os much into OpenAI, however the general consensus is that gemini 2.5 pro is the top model at the moment, including all the AI reviews and OpenAI is barely mentioned when comparing models. O4 will be interesting, but currently? You are not using the best models. Best to read the room.

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#305

Post by jonplackett »

I’m still really surprised everyone loves Gemini 2.5 so much.

Even for coding I find GPT4o to be more concise and write more sensible things.

I get the one-shot ‘build me a flight simulator’ type thing is special to Gemini 2.5 - but who actually ever uses it that way?

I feel a bit old school for aging it, but I still prefer ChatGPT at this moment. Am I the only one?

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#306

Post by crazygringo »

rrr_oh_man wrote: post #207
netcan wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's a limit on how much you can charge people for subscription fees. I think soon people expect this service to be provided for free and ads would become the main option to make money out of chatbots. So... I don't think this is certain. A surprising number of people pay for the ChatGPT app and/or competitors. It's be a >$10bn business already. Could maybe be a >$100bn business long term. Meanwhile... making mo…

> a >$10bn business 'Business is the practice of making one's living or making money by producing or buying and selling products (such as goods and services). It is also "any activity or enterprise entered into for profit."' ¹ Until something makes a profit it's a charity or predatory monopoly-in-waiting.² ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business ² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing

What are you talking about?

No, it's not a charity or a monopoly-in-waiting.

99.9% of the time, it's an investment hoping to make a profit in the future. And we still call those businesses, even if they're losing money like most businesses do at first.

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#307

Post by JKCalhoun »

imiric wrote: post #272
coliveira wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again, our hope is for the Chinese to continue driving the open models. Because if it depends on American big companies the future will be one of dependency on closed AI models.

You can't be serious... You think models built by companies from an autocracy are somehow better? I suppose their biases and censorship are easier to spot, but I wouldn't trade one form of influence over another. Besides, Meta is currently the leader in open-source/weight models. There's no reason that US companies can't continue to innovate in this space.

To play devil's advocate, I have a sense that a state LLM would be untrustworthy when the query is ideological but if it is ad-focused, a capitalist LLM may well corrupt every chat.

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#308

Post by ximeng »

netcan wrote: post #137
codelord wrote: post #31

As an Ex-OpenAI employee I agree with this. Most of the top ML talent at OpenAI already have left to either do their own thing or join other startups. A few are still there but I doubt if they'll be around in a year. The main successful product from OpenAI is the ChatGPT app, but there's a limit on how much you can charge people for subscription fees. I think soon people expect this service to be provided for free an…

> there's a limit on how much you can charge people for subscription fees. I think soon people expect this service to be provided for free and ads would become the main option to make money out of chatbots. So... I don't think this is certain. A surprising number of people pay for the ChatGPT app and/or competitors. It's be a >$10bn business already. Could maybe be a >$100bn business long term. Meanwhile... making mo…

Google aren’t interested in <1bn USD businesses, so it’s hard for them to build anything new as it’s pretty guaranteed to be smaller than that at first. The business equivalent of the danger of a comfortable salaried job.

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#309

Post by jeanlucas »

tomrod wrote: post #266
porphyra wrote: post #256

As long as Google continues to hamstring themselves with censorship for no reason, I can't use their products. The other day I asked gemini 2.5 pro "which british ceo said that his company's products were bad" and the response was > I'm just a language model, so I can't help you with that. https://g.co/gemini/share/cb3afc3e7f78 Chatgpt 4o correctly identified the guy as Ratner and provided the relevant quotes.

Try asking with a Ceasar cipher.

That's a new level of bad user experience

Re: Google is winning on every AI front

#310

Post by ndriscoll »

mike_hearn wrote: post #290
imiric wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're assuming ads would be subtly worked into the answers. There's no reason it has to be done that way. I highly doubt advertisers will settle for a solution that's less profitable. That would be like settling for plain-text ads without profiling data and microtargeting. Google tried that in the "don't be evil" days, and look how that turned out. Besides, astroturfing and influencer-driven campaigns are very pop…

There's no reason why having an LLM be sly or misleading would be more profitable. Too many people try to make advertising a moral issue when it's not, and it sounds like you're falling into that trap. An ideal answer for a query like "Where can I take my wife for a date this weekend?" would be something like, > Here are some events I found ... . Based on our prior conversations, sounds like the third might be the be…

Wouldn't fewer searches indicate better answers? A search engine is productivity software. Productivity software is worse when it requires more user interaction.

Also you don't need ads to answer what to do, just knowledge of the events. Even a poor ranking algorithm is better than "how much someone paid for me to say this" as the ranking. That is possibly the very worst possible ranking.

Post reply on HN