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

Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 683 posts

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#411

Post by golol »

nblgbg wrote: post #380
davesque wrote: post #287

A big red flag for me was that Sundar was prompting the model to report lots of facts that can be either true or false. We all saw the benchmark figures that they published and the results mostly showed marginal improvements. In other words, the issue of hallucination has not been solved. But the demo seemed to imply that it had. My conclusion was that they had mostly cherry picked instances in which the model happen…

The issue of hallucinations won't be solved with the RAG approach. It requires a fundamentally different architecture. These aren't my words but Yann LeCun's. You could easily understand if you spend some time playing around. The autoregressive nature won't allow the LLMs to create an internally consistent model before answering the question. We have approaches like Chain of Thought and others, but they are merely ba…

If you build a complex Chain if Thought style Agent and then train/finetune further by reinforcement learning with this architecture then it is not a band-aid anymore, it is an integral part of the model and the weights will optimize to make use of this CoT ability.

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#413

Post by adriand »

calf wrote: post #330
davesque wrote: post #287

A big red flag for me was that Sundar was prompting the model to report lots of facts that can be either true or false. We all saw the benchmark figures that they published and the results mostly showed marginal improvements. In other words, the issue of hallucination has not been solved. But the demo seemed to imply that it had. My conclusion was that they had mostly cherry picked instances in which the model happen…

Ever since the "stochastic parrots" and "super-autocomplete" criticisms of LLMs, the question is whether hallucinations are solvable in principle at all. And if hallucinations are solvable, it would of such basic and fundamental scientific importance that I think would be another mini-breakthrough in AI.

An interesting perspective on this I’ve heard discussed is whether hallucinations ought to be solved at all, or whether they are core to the way human intelligence works as well, in the sense that that is what is needed to produce narratives.

I believe it is Hinton that prefers “confabulation” to “hallucination” because it’s more accurate. The example in the discussion about hallucination/confabulation was that of someone who had been present in the room during Nixon’s Watergate conversations. Interviewed about what he heard, he provided a narrative that got many facts wrong (who said what, and what exactly was said). Later, when audio tapes surfaced, the inaccuracies in his testimony became known. However, he had “confabulated truthfully”. That is, he had made up a narrative that fit his recall as best as he was able, and the gist of it was true.

Without the ability to confabulate, he would have been unable to tell his story.

(Incidentally, because I did not check the facts of what I just recounted, I just did the same thing…)

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#414

Post by dogprez »

modeless wrote: post #390
dogprez wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rubber duck with a vacuum inside (removing the air material) of it is just a piece of rubber with eyes. Assuming OP's point about the rubber not being less dense than water, it would sink, no?

No. Air is less dense than water; vacuum is even less dense than air. A rubber duck will collapse if you seal it and try to pull a vacuum inside with air outside, but if the rubber duck is in a vacuum then it will have only vacuum inside and it will still float on a liquid the density of water. If you made a duck out of a metal shell you could pull a vacuum inside, like a thermos bottle, and it would float too.

The metal shell is ridged though, so the volume maintains the same with the vacuum. A rubber duck collapses with a vacuum inside of it, thus losing the shape of a duck and reducing the volume of the object =). That's why I said it's just a piece of rubber with eyes.

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#415

Post by sheepscreek »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #100
sheepscreek wrote: post #90

I don’t understand why is Gemini even considered “jaw-dropping” to begin with. GPT-4V has set the bar so high that all their demos and presentations paled in comparison. And it’s available for anyone to use. People have already build mind-blowing demos with it (like https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/11/ai-po... ). The entire launch felt like a concentrated effort to “appear” competitive to OpenAI. G…

Some other commenter, a former googler, a while back alluded to figuring out the big secret and being thrown for a tizzy at the resulting cognitive dissonance they realize they’ve been buying into. Its never about making a good product. Its about keeping up with the joneses in the eyes of tech investors. And just look at the movement on the stock today as a result of this probable lemon of a product: nothing else mat…

I get that. But I don’t get why journalists who cover the industry and are expected to get it would call this “jaw dropping”. Maybe I am reading too much into it. It was likely added to increase the shock factor.

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#416

Post by impulser_ »

DonnyV wrote: post #259

This is so crazy. Google invented transformers which is the bases for all these models. How do they keep fumbling like this over and over. Google Docs created in 2006! Microsoft is eating their lunch. Google creates the ability to change VM's in place and makes a fully automated datacenter. Amazon and Microsoft are killing them in the cloud. Google has been working on self driving longer than anyone. Tesla is catchin…

You bring up fumbles, but they still have the more products with more than a billion users than any company in the world.

This is what Google has always cared about. Bring application to the billions of users.

People are forgetting Google is the most profitable AI company in the world right now. All of their products use ML and AI.

So who is losing?

The goal of Gemini isn't to build a chatbot like ChatGPT despite Google having Bard.

The goal for Gemini is to integrate it into those 10 products they have with a billion users.

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#417

Post by rkeene2 »

freejazz wrote: post #207
rkeene2 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a broken tool is useful, do you not use it because it is broken ? Overpowered LLMs like GPT-4 are both broken (according to how you are defining it) and useful -- they're just not the idealized version of the tool.

Maybe not if its the case that your use of the broken tool would result in the eventual undoing of your work. Like, lets say your staple gun is defective and doesn't shoot the staples deep enough, but it still shoots. You can keep using the gun, but it's not going to actually do its job. It seems useful and functional, but it isn't and its liable to create a much bigger mess.

So to continue the analogy, if the staple gun is broken and it requires you to do more than a working (but non-existent) staple gun BUT less work than doing the affixment without the broken staple gun, you would or would not use it ?

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#418

Post by pphysch »

jonplackett wrote: post #402

OK I get that everyone’s hype sensitive and I absolutely remain to be convinced on Gemini’s actual ability BUT The fact this wasn’t realtime or with voice is not the issue. Voice to text could absolutely capture this conversation easily. And from what I’ve seen Gemini seems quicker than GPT4 Being able to respond quicker and via voice chat is not actually a big deal. The underlying performance of the model is what we…

Exactly.

Corporate tech demo exaggerates actual capabilities and smoothes over rough edges? Impossible, this is unprecedented!!

The Apple vs Google brand war is so tiresome. Let's focus on the tech.

Re: Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice

#420

Post by olyjohn »

bombcar wrote: post #371
hot_gril wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is paid MS Teams is more or less common than paid GSuite? It's hard to find stats on this. GSuite is the better product IMO, but MS has a stronger b2b reputation, and anecdotally I hear more about people using Teams.

Nobody pays for Teams, but everyone pays for Office, and if you get Teams for free with it ...

This is how it became so popular so fast. If they had charged for it, all those Teams users would still be using Zoom.
Post reply on HN