Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

461–470 of 683 posts

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

#461
post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry if this was a joke and I didn't spot it. Chrome was based on WebKit which was itself based on KHTML if memory serves. Chromebooks are based on a version of that outside engine running on top of Linux which they also didn't create.

Chrome as a project was still a Google thing even if they used Konqueror's rendering library. The process model was the novel selling point at the time from my memory [1]. [1] https://www.scottmccloud.com/googlechrome/

The faster javascript runtime was what made it a success IMO.

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

#462
post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineer-driven company. Not enough top-down direction on the products. Too much self-perceived moral high ground. But lately they've been changing this.

My engineer friend who work at Google would strongly disagree with this assertion. I keep hearing about all sorts of hijinks initiated by senior PMs and managers trying to build their fiefdoms.

[deleted]

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

#463

I did this at university. It was our first comp sci class ever, we were given raspberry pi's. We had no coding experience or guidance, and were asked to create "something". All we had to work with was information on how to communicate with the pi using putty. Oddly, this assignment didn't require us to submit code, but simply demonstrate it working. My group (3 of us) bought a moisture sensor to plug into the pi, and…

Is this cheating? It sounds like cheating and reflects quite poorly on you.

Of course it's cheating

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

#464
post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google really hasn't launched a decent in-house product since Gmail What about Chrome? And Chromebooks?

Sorry if this was a joke and I didn't spot it. Chrome was based on WebKit which was itself based on KHTML if memory serves. Chromebooks are based on a version of that outside engine running on top of Linux which they also didn't create.

They used the KDE-derived HTML renderer, sure, but they wrote the whole Javascript runtime from scratch, which was what gave it the speed they used as a selling point.

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

#465
post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineer-driven company. Not enough top-down direction on the products. Too much self-perceived moral high ground. But lately they've been changing this.

My engineer friend who work at Google would strongly disagree with this assertion. I keep hearing about all sorts of hijinks initiated by senior PMs and managers trying to build their fiefdoms.

Disagree with which part? The hijinks are there, no denying it. Kind of a thing at any company, but remedied by leaders above those PMs taking charge.

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

#466
post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Not to mention it integrates with Azure365, which damn near certainly the IT department has already standardized on, feels comfortable with, and has been flooded with enough propaganda to believe anything else is massively less secure. Plus Teams has tons of knobs and buttons for managing what your users do with it... and companies love managing their employees lol. Sure, Teams is a steaming pile of crap to use day-t…

I'm in one nonprofit org using MS 365 and Teams, and listening to the guy behind the original decision talk about that ecosystem, I think its popularity really does come from propaganda. I was almost convinced until I actually used it... what a piece of junk. It's ugly for me and borderline unusable for our nontechnical users. I'm in charge now and considering ditching it.

The only saving grace is that members who can't deal with it are using local MS Office, which has some integrations with 365, thus making it kinda viable. But I feel like it's still a net negative.

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

#467

I did this at university. It was our first comp sci class ever, we were given raspberry pi's. We had no coding experience or guidance, and were asked to create "something". All we had to work with was information on how to communicate with the pi using putty. Oddly, this assignment didn't require us to submit code, but simply demonstrate it working. My group (3 of us) bought a moisture sensor to plug into the pi, and…

Is this cheating? It sounds like cheating and reflects quite poorly on you.

Kind of? Yes but they still demonstrated as much as was expected from them, which was very little to begin with.

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

#468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny because now the OpenAI keynote feels like it's emulating the Google keynotes from 5 years ago. Google Keynote feels like it's emulating the Apple keynote from 5 years ago. And the Apple keynote looks like robots just out of an uncanny valley pretending to be humans - just like keynotes might look in 5 years, but actually made by AI. Apple is always ahead of the curve in keynote trends.

I hadn’t thought about it until just now, but the most recent Apple events really are the closest real-person thing I’ve ever seen to some of the “good” computer generated photorealistic (kinda…) humans “reading” with text-to-speech that I’ve seen. It’s the stillness between “beats” that does it, I think, and the very-constrained and repetitive motion.

Hmm. Like the "NPC fetish" stuff that was going around for a brief minute?

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

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 so…

> Without the ability to confabulate, he would have been unable to tell his story. You can tell a story without making up fiction. Just say you don’t know when you don’t know. Inaccurate information is worse than no information.

> You can tell a story without making up fiction. Just say you don’t know when you don’t know.

The point is that humans can't in general, because we don't actually know which parts of what we "remember" are real and which parts are our brain filling in the blanks. And maybe it's the same for nonhuman intelligences too.

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

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft demoed Office Web Apps in 2008 L.A PDC it seems: https://www.wired.com/2008/10/pdc-2008-look-out-google-docs-...

Don't forget they also invented XHR (aka fetch) in 2001. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest

Kind of, using it became known as "AJAX" and it took many many years (and the addition of promises to JS) before the more sophisticated "Fetch API" became available.

Even then usage of AJAX declined rather slowly as it was so established, and indeed even now it's still used by many websites!

Post reply on HN