521–530 of 1001 posts
I would like to try controlling my browser with this model. Any ideas how to do this. Ideally I would like something like openAI's atlas or perplexity's comet but powered by gemini 3.
I asked it to analyze my tennis serve. It was just dead wrong. For example, it said my elbow was bent. I had to show it a still image of full extension on contact, then it admitted, after reviewing again, it was wrong. Several more issues like this. It blamed it on video being difficult. Not very useful, despite the advertisements: https://x.com/sundarpichai/status/1990865172152660047
the token efficiency and context is also mindblowing...
it feels like I am talking to someone who can think instead of a **rider that just agrees with everything you say and then fails doing basic changes, gpt-5.1 feels particulary slow and weak in real world applications that are larger than a few dozen files.
gemini 2.5 felt really weak considering the amount of data and their proprietary TPU hardware in theory allowing them way more flexibility, but gemini 3 just works and it truly understands which is something I didn't think I'd be saying for a couple more years.
I've been so happy to see Google wake up. Many can point to a long history of killed products and soured opinions but you can't deny theyve been the great balancing force (often for good) in the industry. - Gmail vs Outlook - Drive vs Word - Android vs iOS - Worklife balance and high pay vs the low salary grind of before. Theyve done heaps for the industry. Im glad to see signs of life. Particularly in their P/E whic…
They've poisoned the internet with their monopoly on advertising, the air pollution of the online world, which is an transgression that far outweighs any good they might have done. Much of the negative social effects of being online come from the need to drive more screen time, more engagement, more clicks, and more ad impressions firehosed into the faces of users for sweet, sweet, advertiser money. When Google final…
Even 25 years ago people wouldn't even believe Youtube exists. Anyone can upload whatever they want, however often they want, Youtube will be responsible for promoting it, they'll provide to however many billions users want to view it, and they'll pay you 55% of the revenue it makes?
I've been so happy to see Google wake up. Many can point to a long history of killed products and soured opinions but you can't deny theyve been the great balancing force (often for good) in the industry. - Gmail vs Outlook - Drive vs Word - Android vs iOS - Worklife balance and high pay vs the low salary grind of before. Theyve done heaps for the industry. Im glad to see signs of life. Particularly in their P/E whic…
They've poisoned the internet with their monopoly on advertising, the air pollution of the online world, which is an transgression that far outweighs any good they might have done. Much of the negative social effects of being online come from the need to drive more screen time, more engagement, more clicks, and more ad impressions firehosed into the faces of users for sweet, sweet, advertiser money. When Google final…
I asked it to analyze my tennis serve. It was just dead wrong. For example, it said my elbow was bent. I had to show it a still image of full extension on contact, then it admitted, after reviewing again, it was wrong. Several more issues like this. It blamed it on video being difficult. Not very useful, despite the advertisements: https://x.com/sundarpichai/status/1990865172152660047
My favorite benchmark is to analyze a very long audio file recording of a management meeting and produce very good notes along with a transcript labeling all the speakers. 2.5 was decently good at generating the summary, but it was terrible at labeling speakers. 3.0 has so far absolutely nailed speaker labeling.
My audio experiment was much less successful — I uploaded a 90-minute podcast episode and asked it to produce a labeled transcript. Gemini 3: - Hallucinated at least three quotes (that I checked) resembling nothing said by any of the hosts - Produced timestamps that were almost entirely wrong. Language quoted from the end of the episode, for instance, was timestamped 35 minutes into the episode, rather than 85 minute…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ironically, OpenAI was conceived as a way to balance Google's dominance in AI.
I thought it was a workaround to Google's complete disinterest in productizing the AI research it was doing and publishing, rather than a way to balance their dominance in a market which didn't meaningfully exist.
Yes - less exciting! But worse?