541–550 of 1001 posts
Although open-source is improving immensely it's still far behind GPT4, so it's nice to see another company able to compete with OpenAI.
Gemini Ultra isn't released yet and is months away still. Bard w/ Gemini Pro isn't available in Europe and isn't multi-modal, https://support.google.com/bard/answer/14294096 No public stats on Gemini Pro. (I'm wrong. Pro stats not on website, but tucked in a paper - https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/gemini/gemini_... ) I feel this is overstated hype. There is no competitor to GPT-4 being released today. I…
Not just Europe: also no Canada, China, Russia, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Bulgaria, Norway, Iceland, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worth remembering that AI is more than LLMs. DeepMind is still doing big stuff: https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/millions-of-new-materi...
I just want to underscore that. DeepMind's research output within the last month is staggering: 2023-11-14: GraphCast, word leading weather prediction model, published in Science 2023-11-15: Student of Games: unified learning algorithm, major algorithmic breath-through, published in Science 2023-11-16: Music generation model, seemingly SOTA 2023-11-29: GNoME model for material discovery, published in Nature 2023-12-0…
Where it has fallen down (compared to its relative performance in relevant research) is public generative AI products [0]. It is trying very hard to catch up at that, and its disadvantage isn't technological, but that doesn't mean it isn't real and durable.
[0] I say "generative AI" because AI is a big an amorphous space, and lots of Google's products have some form of AI that is behind important features, so I'm just talking about products where generative AI is the center of what the product offers, which have become a big deal recently and where Google had definitely been delivering far below its general AI research weight class so far.
Severly disappointed.
I don't think they're taking shit seriously. Spent .ore time on the website that. The product. It should be equal too or better than 4.
Gemini Ultra isn't released yet and is months away still. Bard w/ Gemini Pro isn't available in Europe and isn't multi-modal, https://support.google.com/bard/answer/14294096 No public stats on Gemini Pro. (I'm wrong. Pro stats not on website, but tucked in a paper - https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/gemini/gemini_... ) I feel this is overstated hype. There is no competitor to GPT-4 being released today. I…
Agreed. The whole things reeks of being desperate. Half the video is jerking themselves off that they've done AI longer than anyone and they "release" (not actually available in most countries) a model that is only marginally better than the current GPT4 in cherry-picked metrics after nearly a year of lead-time?!?! That's your response? Ouch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do think that’s a backfire. Telling me how long you’ve been doing something isn’t that impressive if the other guy has been doing it for much less time and is better at it. It’s in fact the opposite.
Not if the little guy leveraged your inventions/research.
Which is definitely where Google is in the generative AI space.
This demo is nuts: https://youtu.be/UIZAiXYceBI?si=8ELqSinKHdlGlNpX
How real is it though? This blog post says In this post, we’ll explore some of the prompting approaches we used in our Hands on with Gemini demo video. which makes it sound like they used text + image prompts and then acted them out in the video, as opposed to Gemini interpreting the video directly. https://developers.googleblog.com/2023/12/how-its-made-gemin...
It's that, you know some of this happened and you don't know how much. So when it says "what the quack!" presumably the model was prompted "give me answers in a more fun conversational style" (since that's not the style in any of the other clips) and, like, was it able to do that with just a little hint or did it take a large amount of wrangling "hey can you say that again in a more conversational way, what if you said something funny at the beginning like 'what the quack'" and then it's totally unimpressive. I'm not saying that's what happened, I'm saying "because we know we're only seeing a very fragmentary transcript I have no way to distinguish between the really impressive version and the really unimpressive one."
It'll be interesting to use it more as it gets more generally available though.