3 ms·

> I can feel my usage of Google search taking a nosedive already. Conveniently Gemini is the best frontier model for everything else, they’re very interested a

by baq 2y ago

> I can feel my usage of Google search taking a nosedive already. Conveniently Gemini is the best frontier model for everything else, they’re very interested and well positioned (if not best?) to also be the best in deep research. Let’s check back in 3-6 months.

throwup238 2y ago
IMO they’re already the best. Not only is the rate limit much higher (20/day instead of OpenAI’s 10/month) but Gemini is capable of looking at far more sources, on the order of 10x. I just had a research report last night that looked at 400 sources when I asked it to help identify a first edition Origin of Species (it did a great job too, correctly explaining how to identify a true first edition from chimeral ones).
jillesvangurp 2y ago
Google has two advantages: 1) Their AI models aren't half bad. Gemini 2.5 seems to be doing quite well relative to some competitors. 2) They know how to scale this stuff. They have their own hardware, lots of data, etc. Scaling is of course the hard part. Doing things at Google scale means doing it well while still making a profit. Most AI companies are just converting VC cash into GPUs and energy. VC subsidized AI is nice at a small scale but cripplingly expensive at a larger scale. Google can't do this; they are too large for that. But they are vertically integrated, build their own data centers, with their own TPUs, etc. So, once this starts happening at their scale, they might just have an advantage. A lot of what we are seeing is them learning to walk before they start running faster. Most of the world has no clue what perlexity is or any notion of the pros and cons of claude 3.7 sonnet vs. o4 mini high. None of that stuff matters long term. What matters is who can do this stuff well enough for billions of people. So, I wouldn't count them out. But none of this stuff guarantees success either, of course.

by baq 2y ago

throwup238 2y ago

IMO they’re already the best. Not only is the rate limit much higher (20/day instead of OpenAI’s 10/month) but Gemini is capable of looking at far more sources, on the order of 10x. I just had a research report last night that looked at 400 sources when I asked it to help identify a first edition Origin of Species (it did a great job too, correctly explaining how to identify a true first edition from chimeral ones).

jillesvangurp 2y ago

Google has two advantages: 1) Their AI models aren't half bad. Gemini 2.5 seems to be doing quite well relative to some competitors. 2) They know how to scale this stuff. They have their own hardware, lots of data, etc. Scaling is of course the hard part. Doing things at Google scale means doing it well while still making a profit. Most AI companies are just converting VC cash into GPUs and energy. VC subsidized AI is nice at a small scale but cripplingly expensive at a larger scale. Google can't do this; they are too large for that. But they are vertically integrated, build their own data centers, with their own TPUs, etc. So, once this starts happening at their scale, they might just have an advantage. A lot of what we are seeing is them learning to walk before they start running faster. Most of the world has no clue what perlexity is or any notion of the pros and cons of claude 3.7 sonnet vs. o4 mini high. None of that stuff matters long term. What matters is who can do this stuff well enough for billions of people. So, I wouldn't count them out. But none of this stuff guarantees success either, of course.