In these discussions we see some people hating the models, while others love them. What I find interesting is that this is exactly how we feel about other people - some people will love working with you while others can't stand being in the same room you're in.
Gemini 3.1 Pro
871–880 of 951 posts
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#872Earlier quoted context omitted.
My issue is that we haven't even gotten the release version of 3.0, that is also still in Preview, so may stick with 3.0 till that has been deemed stable. Basically, what does the word "Preview" mean, if newer releases happen before a Preview model is stable? In prior Google models, Preview meant that there'd still be updates and improvements to said model prior to full deployment, something we saw with 2.5. Now, the…
Given the pace AI is improving and that it doesn't give the exact same answers under many circumstances, is the the [in]stability of "preview" a concern? GMail was in "beta" for 5 years.
Should have clarified initially what I meant by stable, especially because it isn't that known how these terms are defined for Gemini models. Not talking about getting consistent output from a not-deterministic model, but stable from a usage perspective and in the way Google uses the word "stable" to describe their model deployments [0]. "Preview" in regard to Gemini models means a few very specific restrictions including far stricter rate limits and a very tight 14 day deprecation window, making them models one cannot build on.
That is why I'd prefer for them to finish the role out of an existing model before starting work on a dedicated new version.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#873Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure it writes comments for itself, not for the user. I always let the models comment as much as they want, because I feel it makes the context more robust, especially when cycling contexts often to keep them fresh. There is a tradeoff though, as comments do consumer context. But I tend to pretty liberally dispense of instances and start with a fresh window.
> I'm pretty sure it writes comments for itself, not for the user Yeah, that sounds worse than "trying to helpful". Read the code instead, why add indirection in that way, just to be able to understand what other models understand without comments?
The Indirection is on purpose, it works like a continued chain of thought.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#874Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given the pace AI is improving and that it doesn't give the exact same answers under many circumstances, is the the [in]stability of "preview" a concern? GMail was in "beta" for 5 years.
ChatGPT 4.5 was never released to the public, but it is widely believed to be the foundation the 5.x series is built on. Wonder how GP feels about the minor bumps for other model providers?
Minor version bumps are good and I want model providers to communicate changes. The issue I am having is that Gemini "preview" class models have different deprecation timelines and rate limits, making them impossible to rely on for professional use cases. That's why I'd prefer they finish the 3.0 role out prior to putting resources into deploying a second "preview" class model.
For a stable deployment, Google needs a sufficient amount of hardware to guarantee inference and having two Pro models running makes that even more challenging: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/models
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#875Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do they consistently mess things up ? Current market cap 3.7T, only Apple and Nvidia are bigger. Youtube is a huge success, Search is still growing at 10%-15% which is crazy, cloud growing at 35%ish, TPUs enable them to be independent from NVidia etc. Gemini market share went up from 5%-6% early 2025 to 21% early 2026. I personally bet Gemini market share will keep growing. They are executing well on all vertical…
Exactly. You might not like what Google does, but you can't deny it's a massive commercial success. Just because their approach to creating and delivering apps might not be to your liking, you might actually be the niche.
Yeah but if we think about this in terms of "people love dumb things", then it makes sense what the other person is saying, no? As an example, compare it to how people are when it comes to tech, as in, they are tech-illiterate. Us, power users would not want an OS that is dumbed down... or compare it to YouTubers who are richer than an SWE and all they do is upload "brainrot". That is the audience, that is why these YouTubers also have "massive commercial success".
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#876Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that semantically this question is too similar to the car wash one. Changing subjects from car to elephant and car wash to creek does not change the fact that they are subjects. The embeddings will be similar in that dimension.
I understand. But isn't it a sign of "smarts" that one can generalize from analoguous tasks?
LLMs are great at knowledge transfer, the real question is how well can they demonstrate intelligence with "unknown unknown" types of questions. This model has the benefit of being released after that issue became public knowledge, so it's hard to know how it would've performed pre-hoc.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#877Earlier quoted context omitted.
So much this. It's absolutely amazing how hostile Google is to releasing billing options that are reasonable, controllable, or even fucking understandable. I want to do relatively simple things like: 1. Buy shit from you 2. For a controllable amount (ex - let me pick a limit on costs) 3. Without spending literally HOURS trying to understand 17 different fucking products, all overlapping, with myriad project configs,…
You think AWS is better?
Scarily - yes, although not by much.
I've used all 3 major providers - AWS, GCP, Azure.
AWS is no gem... it also has it's own byzantine processes to sign up and pay for things. And it also doesn't support any real and reasonable way to stop spend when you hit limits (abusive practices).
But at least I can generally sign up for and consume a new service without hours and hours of debugging.
For context - Google own Gemini 3 utterly fails to figure out how to do something as simple as "access the image doodle feature" proudly marketed here: https://gemini.google/overview/image-generation/
It can't figure out how to do. Honestly, I still can't figure out how to do it, despite signing up for about 5 different products, and trying 4 different UIs. The closest I got was to their inpainting/outpainting UI on the legacy models in their image create studio.
And none of that involved creating a billing account, which I already had, and was required for 3 of the signups.
As far as I'm concerned, this feature is fake marketing. It doesn't exist. That's the "quality" level of GCP.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#878Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven't used Anthropic's desktop app in months since I don't have access to a Mac anymore, but when I did...it was just an electron app? Did something change?
Not only that, it is the slowest app among all AI apps.
It also has some strange bugs between versions. There was an update a month or two ago that caused the app to be unable to quit normally, and I would have to 'force quit' it. Thankfully it was resolved, but it was unnerving to not be able to close the app normally.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#879Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm thinking now that as models get better and better at generating SVGs, there could be a point where we can use them to just make arbitrary UIs and interactive media with raw SVGs in realtime (like flash games).
> there could be a point where we can use them to just make arbitrary UIs and interactive media with raw SVGs So render ui elements using xml-like code in a web browser? You’re not going to believe me when I tell you this…
You’re not going to believe me when I tell you this, but generating a webpage with HTML is far simpler than generating arbitrary graphics (that look good) with SVGs.
Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro
#880People underrate Google's cost effectiveness so much. Half price of Opus. HALF. Think about ANY other product and what you'd expect from the competition thats half the price. Yet people here act like Gemini is dead weight ____ Update: 3.1 was 40% of the cost to run AA index vs Opus Thinking AND SONNET, beat Opus, and still 30% faster for output speed. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?speed=intelligence-vs-speed&m...
There's cost, and cost effectiveness. I'd say so far that received negative value for the prompts that I've sent to Gemini 3.
Skill issue, maybe, but I can't get gemini to do any nontrivial tasks reliably, and it's difficult to have it do trivial tasks without getting distracted and making unrelated changes that eat my time and mental energy to think about.
The breakthrough advance of Opus 4.5 over 4.1 wasn't so much an intelligence jump, but a jump in discerning scope and intent behind user queries.