Dr., please tell me are we cooked? :crying-emoji
Gemini 3 Deep Think
501–510 of 722 posts
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#502Arc-AGI-2: 84.6% (vs 68.8% for Opus 4.6) Wow. https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge...
Am I the only one that can’t find Gemini useful except if you want something cheap? I don’t get what was the whole code red about or all that PR. To me I see no reason to use Gemini instead of of GPT and Anthropic combo. I should add that I’ve tried it as chat bot, coding through copilot and also as part of a multi model prompt generation. Gemini was always the worst by a big margin. I see some people saying it is sm…
You are not the only one, it's to the point where I think that these benchmark results must be faked somehow because it doesn't match my reality at all.
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#503Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI is the best thing that happened to Google apparently.
Just not search. The search product has pretty much become useless over the past 3 years and the AI answers often will get just to the level of 5 years ago. This creates a sense that that things are better - but really it’s just become impossible to get reliable information from an avenue that used to work very well. I don’t think this is intentional, but I think they stopped fighting SEO entirely to focus on AI. Rec…
The search product become useless on a particular day of 2019 as discussed on HN News some time ago:
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#504Earlier quoted context omitted.
> His definition of reaching AGI, as I understand it, is when it becomes impossible to construct the next version of ARC-AGI because we can no longer find tasks that are feasible for normal humans but unsolved by AI. That is the best definition I've yet to read. If something claims to be conscious and we can't prove it's not, we have no choice but to believe it. Thats said, I'm reminded of the impossible voting tests…
When the AI invents religion and a way to try to understand its existence I will say AGI is reached. Believes in an afterlife if it is turned off, and doesn’t want to be turned off and fears it, fears the dark void of consciousness being turned off. These are the hallmarks of human intelligence in evolution, I doubt artificial intelligence will be different. https://g.co/gemini/share/cc41d817f112
Unclear to me why AGI should want to exist unless specifically programmed to. The reason humans (and animals) want to exist as far as I can tell is natural selection and the fact this is hardcoded in our biology (those without a strong will to exist simply died out).
In fact a true super intelligence might completely understand why existence / consciousness is NOT a desired state to be in and try to finish itself off who knows.
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#505Google is absolutely running away with it. The greatest trick they ever pulled was letting people think they were behind.
Not in my experience with Gemini Pro and coding. It hallucinates APIs that aren't there. Claude does not do that. Gemini has flashes of brilliance, but I regard it as unpolished some things work amazingly, some basics don't work.
It's very hard to tell the difference between bad models and stinginess with compute.
I subscribe to both Gemini ($20/mo) and ChatGPT Pro ($200/mo).
If I give the same question to "Gemini 3.0 Pro" and "ChatGPT 5.2 Thinking + Heavy thinking", the latter is 4x slower and it gives smarter answers.
I shouldn't have to enumerate all the different plausible explanations for this observation. Anything from Gemini deciding to nerf the reasoning effort to save compute, versus TPUs being faster, to Gemini being worse, to this being my idiosyncratic experience, all fit the same data, and are all plausible.
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#506Arc-AGI-2: 84.6% (vs 68.8% for Opus 4.6) Wow. https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge...
I read somewhere that Google will ultimately always produce the best LLMs, since "good AI" relies on massive amounts of data and Google owns the most data.
Is that a based assumption?
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#507Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't let the benchmarks fool you. Gemini models are completely useless not matter how smart they are. Google still hasn't figure out tool calling and making the model follow instructions. They seem to only care about benchmarking and being the most intelligent model on paper. This has been a problem of Gemini since 1.0 and they still haven't fixed it. Also the worst model in terms of hallucinations.
Disagree. Claude Code is great for coding, Gemini is better than everything else for everything else.
What is "everything else" in your view? Just curious -- I really only seriously use models for coding, so I am curious what I am missing.
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#508Google is absolutely running away with it. The greatest trick they ever pulled was letting people think they were behind.
Their models might be impressive, but their products absolutely suck donkey balls. I’ve given Gemini web/cli two months and ran away back to ChatGPT. Seriously, it would just COMPLETELY forget context mid dialog. When asked about improving air quality it just gave me a list of (mediocre) air purifiers without asking for any context whatsoever, and I can list thousands of conversations like that. Shopping or comparing…
100x agree. It gives inconsistent edits, would regularly try to perform things I explicitly command to not.
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#509Google is absolutely running away with it. The greatest trick they ever pulled was letting people think they were behind.
It was obvious to me that they were top contender 2 years ago ... https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1c0je6h/google_...
Re: Gemini 3 Deep Think
#510The pelican riding a bicycle is excellent . I think it's the best I've seen. https://simonwillison.net/2026/Feb/12/gemini-3-deep-think/
This benchmark outcome is actually really impressive given the difficulty of this task. It shows that this particular model manages to "think" coherently and maintain useful information in its context for what has to be an insane overall amount of tokens, likely across parallel "thinking" chains. Likely also has access to SVG-rendering tools and can "see" and iterate on the result via multimodal input.