Gemini "duck" demo was not done in realtime or with voice • Hacker News Board

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

#501

Post by jballer » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 4:57 AM UTC

godelski wrote: post #497

im3w1l wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it sounds like a useful thing, for communicating your vision and getting early feedback on whether you are building the right thing. Like uh, a live action blueprint. Let's say the client is like "Email???? That's no good. It needs to be a text message". Now you have saved yourself the trouble of implementing email.

> To me it sounds like a useful thing To me it sounds like lying... Context matters a ton though. Are you presenting the demo as if the events are being automatically triggered (as in the OP) or are you presenting as this is your plan? Explicitly. If it is implicit, it's deceptive. If you explicitly do not say what parts are faked, it is lying. Of course in a magic show this is totally okay because you're going to th…

How about in the original iPhone keynote, when Steve says “this cable is just here for it to work on our projector” - if you follow closely, there was no phone demo’d that day with screen on and no cable. I’m sure the main board was still external.

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

#502

Post by squigglydonut » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 4:58 AM UTC

Hard to build when you fire everyone huh

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

#503

Post by joshspankit » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:01 AM UTC

renegade-otter wrote: post #202

dougmwne wrote: post #83

I was fooled. The model release announcement said it could accept video and audio multi-modal input. I understood that there was a lot of editing and cutting, but I really believed I was looking at an example of video and audio input. I was completely impressed since it’s quite a leap to go from text and still images to “eyes and ears.” There’s even the segment where instruments are drown and music was generated. I t…

This kind of moral fraud - unethical behavior - is tolerated for some reason. It's almost like investors want to be fooled. There is no room for due diligence. They squeel like excited Taylor Swift fans as they are being lied to.

As long as you’re not the last one out, “being fooled” can be very profitable

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

#504

Post by lizard » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:03 AM UTC

godelski wrote: post #498

lizard wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This can depend a lot on the context, which we don't have a lot of. Looking at this a different way, they gave first-year students, likely with no established pre-requistites, an open-ended project with fixed hardware but no expectation to submit the final project for review. If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with…

> If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with the source code. Wait, is your argument honestly "it's not cheating because they just trusted the students"? There's a huge difference between demoing something as "this is what we did" vs "we didn't quite get there, but this is what we're envisioning." Edit: You all are re…

No, the argument is, "It's not cheating because it wasn't a programming assignment."

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

#505

Post by joshspankit » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:04 AM UTC

godelski wrote: post #498

lizard wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This can depend a lot on the context, which we don't have a lot of. Looking at this a different way, they gave first-year students, likely with no established pre-requistites, an open-ended project with fixed hardware but no expectation to submit the final project for review. If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with…

> If they wanted to verify the students actually developed a working program, they could have easily asked for the Pi's to be returned along with the source code. Wait, is your argument honestly "it's not cheating because they just trusted the students"? There's a huge difference between demoing something as "this is what we did" vs "we didn't quite get there, but this is what we're envisioning." Edit: You all are re…

No, it’s not cheating because the ask was “something” not “some program”

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

#506

Post by gitaarik » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:06 AM UTC

asadotzler wrote: post #434

kokanee wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine the commenter was calling out what they perceived to be an inauthentic yet carefully planned facade of diversity. This marketing trend rubs me the wrong way as well, because it reminds me of how I was raised and educated as a 90s kid to believe that racism was a thing of the past. That turned out to be a damaging lie. I don't mean to imply that companies should avoid displays of diversity, I just mean that…

You'd prefer the alternative with just a few white guys in the picture and no consideration given at all to appearing diverse?

The alternative is to just be authentic and not put up a fake show.

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

#507

Post by fieldcny » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:07 AM UTC

marcusjt wrote: post #470

flakiness wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

I assume you mean the decline in the use of the term AJAX as it was now just the standard and you don’t need to use that to describe your site or tool as being capable of being highly interactive and dynamic vs just static.

Before the invention of the xmlhttprequest there was so little you could do with JS most dynamic content was some version of shifty tricks with iframes or img tags or anything that could trigger the browser to make a server request to a url that you could generate dynamically.

Fetch was the formalization of the xmlhttprequest (hence the use of xhr as the name of the request type ). Jquery wrapped it really nicely and essentially popularized (they may have invented async js leveraging callbacks and the like), the creation of promises was basically the formalization and standardization of this.

So AJAX itself is in fact used almost in the entire totality of the web, the term has become irrelevant given the absolute domination of the technology.

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

#508

Post by kjkjadksj » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:13 AM UTC

jerf wrote: post #225

kjkjadksj wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be taught to use the home row because the natural inclination for most people is to peck and hunt with their two index fingers. Watch how old people or young kids type. That being said staying on the home row is how you type fast and make the most of the layout. Everything is comfortably reachable for the most part unless you are a windows user ime.

If you learn a keyboard layout where the home row is actually the most common keys you use, you will not have to be encouraged to use the home row. You just will. I know, because I have, and I never "tried" to use the home row. People don't hunt and peck after years of keyboard use because of the keyboard; they do it because of the keyboard layout . If you want to prove I'm wrong, go learn Dvorak or Colemak and show…

People will actually avoid using their nondominant fingers like their ring or pinky. Its an issue with typing irrespective of layout. Its an issue with guitarplaying even. I am no pianist but I wouldn’t be surprised if new players have an aversion towards using those fingers as well.

I understand how dvorak is designed. I am still not convinced people will be using all their fingers especially their pinkys in a consistent manner that without learning that this is what you should work towards.

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

#509

Post by my123 » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:18 AM UTC

jballer wrote: post #501

godelski wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To me it sounds like a useful thing To me it sounds like lying... Context matters a ton though. Are you presenting the demo as if the events are being automatically triggered (as in the OP) or are you presenting as this is your plan? Explicitly. If it is implicit, it's deceptive. If you explicitly do not say what parts are faked, it is lying. Of course in a magic show this is totally okay because you're going to th…

How about in the original iPhone keynote, when Steve says “this cable is just here for it to work on our projector” - if you follow closely, there was no phone demo’d that day with screen on and no cable. I’m sure the main board was still external.

No, the main board wasn't external at that time. The Wallaby were a different design.

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

#510

Post by phire » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 5:19 AM UTC

golol wrote: post #411

nblgbg wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's been 3.5 years since GPT-3 was released, and just over a year since ChatGPT was released to the public.

If it was possible to solve LLM hallucinations with simple Chain-of-Thought style agents, someone would have done that and released a product by now.

The fact that nobody has released such a product, is pretty strong evidence that you can't fix hallucinations via Chain-of-Thought or Retrieval-Augmented Generation, or any other band-aid approaches.