Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gemini AI

deepmind.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: Gemini AI

#641

Post by xipho »

dontupvoteme wrote: post #452
tikkun wrote: post #60

One observation: Sundar's comments in the main video seem like he's trying to communicate "we've been doing this ai stuff since you (other AI companies) were little babies" - to me this comes off kind of badly, like it's trying too hard to emphasize how long they've been doing AI (which is a weird look when the currently publicly available SOTA model is made by OpenAI, not Google). A better look would simply be to sh…

He's not wrong. DeepMind spends time solving big scientific / large-scale problems such as those in genetics, material science or weather forecasting, and Google has untouchable resources such as all the books they've scanned (and already won court cases about) They do make OpenAI look like kids in that regard. There is far more to technology than public facing goods/products. It's probably in part due to the cultura…

> and Google has untouchable resources such as all the books they've scanned (and already won court cases about)

https://www.hathitrust.org/ has that corpus, and its evolution, and you can propose to get access to it via collaborating supercomputer access. It grows very rapidly. InternetArchive would also like to chat I expect. I've also asked, and prompt manipulated chatGPT to estimate the total books it is trained with, it's a tiny fraction of the corpus, I wonder if it's the same with Google?

Re: Gemini AI

#642

Post by moffkalast »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #598
ACS_Solver wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To quote Gemini, what the quack! Even with the understanding that these are handpicked interactions that are likely to be among the system's best responses, that is an extremely impressive level of understanding and reasoning.

What would be Gemini's current IQ? I would suspect it's higher than the average human's.

GPT 4 already scored higher than 95% of people. The average human isn't really all that smart.

Re: Gemini AI

#643

Post by xnx »

ugh123 wrote: post #576
tikkun wrote: post #60

One observation: Sundar's comments in the main video seem like he's trying to communicate "we've been doing this ai stuff since you (other AI companies) were little babies" - to me this comes off kind of badly, like it's trying too hard to emphasize how long they've been doing AI (which is a weird look when the currently publicly available SOTA model is made by OpenAI, not Google). A better look would simply be to sh…

> One observation: Sundar's comments in the main video seem like he's trying to communicate "we've been doing this ai stuff since you (other AI companies) Sundar has been saying this repeatedly since Day 0 of the current AI wave. It's almost cliche for him at this point.

Sundar announced his intentions to lead Google as an "AI first" company in May 2017: https://blog.google/technology/ai/making-ai-work-for-everyon...

Re: Gemini AI

#644

Post by notpachet »

xipho wrote: post #641
dontupvoteme wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not wrong. DeepMind spends time solving big scientific / large-scale problems such as those in genetics, material science or weather forecasting, and Google has untouchable resources such as all the books they've scanned (and already won court cases about) They do make OpenAI look like kids in that regard. There is far more to technology than public facing goods/products. It's probably in part due to the cultura…

> and Google has untouchable resources such as all the books they've scanned (and already won court cases about) https://www.hathitrust.org/ has that corpus, and its evolution, and you can propose to get access to it via collaborating supercomputer access. It grows very rapidly. InternetArchive would also like to chat I expect. I've also asked, and prompt manipulated chatGPT to estimate the total books it is trained…

> I've also asked, and prompt manipulated chatGPT to estimate the total books it is trained with

Whatever answer it gave you is not reliable.

Re: Gemini AI

#645

Post by spaceman_2020 »

moffkalast wrote: post #635
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm legitimately starting to wonder what white collar workers will even do in 5-10 years. This just Year 1 of this stuff going mainstream. Careers are 25-30 years long. What will someone entering the workforce today even be doing in 2035?

Yeah it has been quite the problem to think about ever since the original release of ChatGPT, as it was already obvious where this will be going and multimodal models more or less confirmed it. There's two ways this goes: UBI or gradual population reduction through unemployment and homelessness. There's no way the average human will be able to produce any productive value outside manual labor in 20 years. Maybe not e…

More than efficiency and costs, I think the real driver of AI adoption in big corp will be the reduction of all the baggage human beings bring. AI will never ask for sick days, will never walk in with a hangover, never be unproductive because their 3 month old baby kept them up all night...

An AI coder will always be around, always be a "team player", always be chipper and friendly. That's management's wet dream.

Re: Gemini AI

#646

Post by elbasti »

nuccy wrote: post #568
EZ-E wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity I fed ChatGPT 4 a few of the challenges through a photo (unclear if Gemini takes live video feed as input but GPT does not afaik) and it did pretty well. It was able to tell a duck was being drawn at an earlier stage before Gemini did. Like Gemini it was able to tell where the duck should go - to the left path to the swan. Because and I quote "because ducks and swans are both waterfowl, so the swan d…

Gemini made a mistake, when asked if the rubber duck floats, it says (after squeaking comment): "it is a rubber duck, it is made of a material which is less dense than water". Nope... rubber is not less dense (and yes, I checked after noticing, rubber duck is typically made of synthetic vinyl polymer plastic [1] with density of about 1.4 times the density of water, so duck floats because of air-filled cavity inside a…

This is exactly the failure mode of GPTs that make me worry about the future idiotization of the world.

"Rubber ducks float because they are made of a material less dense than water" both is wrong but sounds reasonable. Call it a "bad grade school teacher" kind of mistake.

Pre-gpt, however, it's not the kind of mistake that would make it to print: people writing about rubber ducks were probably rubber duck experts (or had high school level science knowledge).

Print Is cite-able. Print perpetuates and reinforces itself. Some day someone will write a grade school textbook built with GPTs, that will have this incorrect knowledge, and so on.

But what will become of us when most gateways to knowledge are riddled with bullshit like this?

Re: Gemini AI

#647

Post by gcau »

>are you gemini? >LOL. Got that wrong earlier today. Bard is on Gemini Pro in English across most of the world as of Dec 6, 2023.

It gives this exact same answer every time, and is a really weird and unprofessional response. Even if you ask it to be more formal it gives the exact same answer.

Re: Gemini AI

#648

Post by gchokov »

Improvements over GPT-4 are marginal. Given that this is Google, I.e. privacy doesn’t exist, I will not touch it tool at all.

Re: Gemini AI

#649

Post by acchow »

alberth wrote: post #457
EZ-E wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Investors are getting impatient! ChatGPT has already replaced Google for me and I wonder if Google starts to feel the pressure.

> "ChatGPT has already replaced Google for me" Would you mind elaborating more on this. Like how are you "searching" with ChatGPT?

ChatGPT does Bing searches automatically then consumes the results for you.

Re: Gemini AI

#650

Post by foota »

ghj wrote: post #569

Some people on codeforces (the competitive programming platform that this was tested on) are discussing the model: https://codeforces.com/blog/entry/123035 Seems like they don't believe that it solved the 3200 rated problem ( https://codeforces.com/contest/1810/problem/G ) w/o data leakage For context, there are only around 20 humans above 3200 rating in the world. During the contest, there were only 21 successful su…

I guess we'll know in a few months (whenever the model is available and the next competition is run)
Post reply on HN