14 ms·

How Google got its groove back and edged ahead of OpenAI

236 points by jbredeche 9mo ago

84729839278392 9mo ago
[dead]
byyoung3 9mo ago
I think Gemini is still far behind.
- lukebechtel 9mo ago
  why?
  - AlienRobot 9mo ago
    I'm not OP but I tried to ask it today to explain to me how proxies work, and it felt like it couldn't give me an answer that it couldn't attribute to a link. While that sounds good on paper, the problem is that no matter what you ask, you end up with very similar answers because it has less freedom to generate text. While on the other hand, even if attributes everything to a link, there is no guarantee that link actually says what the LLM is telling you it says, so it's just the worse of both worlds. ChatGPT on the other hand was able to reformulate the explanation until I understood the part I was struggling with, namely what prevents a proxy from simply passing its own public key as the website's public key. It did so without citing anything.
    - deleted 9mo ago
      [deleted]
    - electroglyph 9mo ago
      did it tell you how smart your questions were, too?
- AshamedCaptain 9mo ago
  Maybe this week it is.
- nemo 9mo ago
  I did some tests with heavily math oriented programming using ChatGPT and Gemini to rubber-duck (not agentic), going over C performance tuning, checking C code for possible optimizations, going over math oriented code and number theory, and working on optimizing threading, memory throughput, etc. to make the thing go faster, then benchmarking runs of the updated code. Gemini was by far better than ChatGPT in this domain. I was able to test changes by benchmarking. For my use case it was night and day, Gemini's advice generally quite strong and was useful to significantly improve benchmarked performance, ChatGPT was far less useful for this use case. What will work for you will depend on your use case, how well your prompting is tuned to the system you're using, and who knows what other factors, but I have a lot of benchmarks that are clear evidence of the opposite of your experience.
  - CamperBob2 9mo ago
    Which models? It's completely uninformative to say you compared "ChatGPT" and "Gemini." Those are both just brand names under which several different models are offered, ranging from slow-witted to scary-smart.
shimman 9mo ago
Being a monopoly worth trillions while having enough BUs to subsidize anything you can imagine does have its perks.
- asa400 9mo ago
  Additionally, they have built-in distribution and integration for their products. I don’t know how folks don’t see that as a massive advantage. It’s like Microsoft and Internet Explorer in the 90s but on a much larger scale both in the breadth (number of distribution channels) and depth (market share of those channels in their respective verticals).
  - maxkfranz 9mo ago
    That's true. It's also a fine line to walk for Google. Google has recently received regulatory pressure, for instance, just like Microsoft had trouble in the late 90s.
- paxys 9mo ago
  Didn't work for Meta
  - blitzar 9mo ago
    Skill issue.
  - ajross 9mo ago
    Or Apple. Also Microsoft who were the ones bankrolling OpenAI before it started floating on its own equity. In point of fact money to throw at AI development is essentially free, not one of the big players sustains itself on income. Investors are throwing every dollar they have at everyone with a usable pitch. Whatever advantages Google had, financial stability is way, way down the list. For better theories, look to "Proven Leader at Scaling Datacenters" and "Decoupled from the CUDA Cartel via being an early moving on custom AI hardware".
  - shimman 9mo ago
    The issue with Meta is entirely confined to a single individual, Zuckerberg.
binarymax 9mo ago
This reads like a paid post from Google.
- almosthere 9mo ago
  This reads like a paid comment from OpenAI.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - binarymax 9mo ago
    It most certainly is not.
- zaphirplane 9mo ago
  There are an increasing number of breathless Gemini fans posting
cmiles8 9mo ago
A bit of PR puffery, but it is fair to say that between Gemini and others it’s now been clearly demonstrated that OpenAI doesn’t have any clear moat.
- amelius 9mo ago
  If the bubble doesn't burst in the next few days, then this is clearly wrong.
  - Octoth0rpe 9mo ago
    Out of curiosity, why that specific timeframe? is there a significant unveiling supposed to happen? Something CES related?
  - willparks 9mo ago
    Next few days? Might be a bit longer than that.
    - amelius 9mo ago
      Why? They said "clearly demonstrated". If it is so clear, then investors will want to pull their money out.
      - esafak 9mo ago
        What if all investors don't agree with this article?
      - array_key_first 9mo ago
        Most investors are dumb as rocks, or, at least, don't know shit about what they're investing in. I mean, I don't know squat about chemical manufacturing but I have some investment in that. It's not about who's the best, it's about where the market is. Dogpiling on growing companies is a proven way to make a lot of money, so people do it, and it's accelerated by index funds. The REAL people supporting Google and Nvidia isn't wallstreet, it's your 401K.
qsort 9mo ago
It seems to me like this is yet another instance of just reading vibes, like when GPT 5 was underwhelming and people were like "AI is dead", or people thinking Google was behind last year when 2.5 pro was perfectly fine, or overhyping stuff that makes no sense like Sora. Wasn't the consensus that 3.0 isn't that great compared to how it benchmarks? I don't even know anymore, I feel I'm going insane.
- SirensOfTitan 9mo ago
  I have a weakly held conviction (because it is based on my personal qualitative opinion) that Google aggressively and quietly quantizes (or reduces compute/thinking on) their models a little while after release. Gemini 2.5 Pro 3-25 benchmark was by far my favorite model this year, and I noticed an extreme drop off of quality responses around the beginning of May when they pointed that benchmark to a newer version (I didn't even know they did this until I started searching for why the model degraded so much). I noticed a similar effect with Gemini 3.0: it felt fantastic over the first couple weeks of use, and now the responses I get from it are noticeably more mediocre. I'm under the impression all of the flagship AI shops do these kinds of quiet changes after a release to save on costs (Anthropic seems like the most honest player in my experience), and Google does it more aggressively than either OpenAI or Anthropic.
  - trvz 9mo ago
    It's the fate of people relying on cloud services, including the complete removal of old LLM versions. If you want stability you go local.
    - gardnr 9mo ago
      Which models do you use locally?
  - vedmakk 9mo ago
    I can definitely confirm this from my experience. Gemini 3 feels even worse than GPT-4o right now. I dont understand the hype or why OpenAI would need a red alert because of it? Both Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2 are much more pleasant to use.
wewewedxfgdf 9mo ago
I feel like Gemini made a giant leap forward in its coding capabilities and then in the past week or so it's become shit again - constantly dropping most of the code from my program when I ask it to add a feature - it's gone from incredible to basically useless.
- vedmakk 9mo ago
  Same experience here. Shame.
bookman10 9mo ago
They're about the same as far as I can tell.
djoldman 9mo ago
Alternate link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/how-google-got-its-groove-back-and-edged-ahead-of-openai/ar-AA1THFBj https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/how-google-got-its-gro...
handelaar 9mo ago
https://archive.is/TyJ8q https://archive.is/TyJ8q
HackerThemAll 9mo ago
The best decision for Google happened like 10 years ago when they started manufacturing their own silicon for crunching neural nets. No matter if they had a really good crystal ball back then, smart people, time travel machine or just luck, it pays for them now. They don't need to participate in that Ponzi scheme that OpenAI, Nvidia and Microsoft created, and they don't need to wait in line to buy Nvidia cards.
- jeffbee 9mo ago
  It had to have been launched longer ago than that because their first public-facing, TPU-using generative product was Inbox Smart Reply, which launched more than 10 years ago. Add to that however much time had to pass up to the point where they had the hardware in production. I think the genesis of the project must have been 12-15 years ago.
  - dgacmu 9mo ago
    About 12. First deployed mid 2015.
  - jillesvangurp 9mo ago
    The acquired podcast did a nice episode on the history of AI in Google recently going back all the way to when they were trying to do the "I feel lucky", early versions of translate, etc. All of which laid the ground work for adding AI features to Google and running them at Google scale. That started early in the history of Google when they did everything on CPUs still. The transition to using GPU accelerated algorithms at scale started happening pretty early in Google around 2009/2010 when they started doing stuff with voice and images. This started with Google just buying a few big GPUs for their R&D and then suddenly appearing as a big customer for NVidia who up to then had no clue that they were going to be an AI company. The internal work on TPUs started around 2013. They deployed the first versions around 2015 and have been iterating on those since then. Interestingly, OpenAI was founded around the same time. OpenAI has a moat as well in terms of brand recognition and diversified hardware supplier deals and funding. Nvidia is no longer the only game in town and Intel and AMD are in scope as well. Google's TPUs give them a short term advantage but hardware capabilities are becoming a commodity long term. OpenAI and Google need to demonstrate value to end users, not cost optimizations. This is about where the many billions on AI subscription spending is going to go. Google might be catching up, but OpenAI is the clear leader in terms of paid subscriptions. Google has been chasing different products for the last fifteen years in terms of always trying to catch up with the latest and greatest in terms messaging, social networking, and now AI features. They are doing a lot of copycat products; not a lot of original ones. It's not a safe bet that this will go differently for them this time.
zeroonetwothree 9mo ago
I don't think it's really "ahead" but it's pretty close now. There's not that big a difference among the SOTA models, they all have their pros/cons.
- mcast 9mo ago
  It’s incredibly impressive to see a large company with over 30x as many employees (or 2x if you compare with GDM) than OAI step back into the AI race compared to where they were with Bard a few years ago. Google has proved it doesn’t want to be the next IBM or Microsoft.
  - jasonfarnon 9mo ago
    "the next IBM or Microsoft." Actually Microsoft has also shown it doesn't want to be the next IBM. I think at this point Apple is the one where I have trouble seeing a long-term plan.
    - gbear605 9mo ago
      Microsoft was sort of showing that a year ago, and then spent the whole last year showing everyone that they're just another IBM.
      - grumbelbart2 9mo ago
        It probably depends on what "The next IBM" means for people. Microsoft is so deeply embedded into companies right now that for larger cooperation it's practically impossible to get rid of them, and their cloud-driven strategy is very profitable.
        gbear605 9mo ago
        IBM still makes a lot of money from large corporations that depend on them. But yet…
  - culi 9mo ago
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
sxp 9mo ago
> Naina Raisinghani, 00 needed a name for the new tool to complete the upload. It was 2:30 a.m., though, and nobody was around. So she just made one up, a mashup of two nicknames friends had given her: Nano Banana. Ah, that explains the silly name for such an impressive tool. I guess it's more a more Googley name than what would have otherwise been chosen: Google Gemini Image Pro Red for Workspace.
- jofzar 9mo ago
  I honestly love the name nano banana, it's stupid as hell, but it's a bit of joy to say specially with how corporate everything is name wised these days.
  - underdeserver 9mo ago
    Whimsical.
  - Hammershaft 9mo ago
    I agree, it's a great silly name that immediately jumped out at me because it felt so distant from the focus tested names out of marketing that have become the standard today.
- cmrdporcupine 9mo ago
  I like that it's evidence that there's still some remnants of the old Google culture there.
- perardi 9mo ago
  Strongly disagree. Google, OpenAI, and Microsoft all have a very confusing product naming strategy where it’s all lumped under Gemini/ChatGPT/Copilot, and the individual product names are not memorable and really quite obscure. (What does Codex do again?) Nano Banana doesn’t tell you what the product does, but you sure remember the name. It really rolls off the tongue, and it looks really catchy on social media.
paulpauper 9mo ago
Gemini is great because of far fewer rate limits compared to Open AI . When I hit a rate limit on Open AI, I switch to gemini.
- kelseyfrog 9mo ago
  Why not start with Gemini then?
vedmakk 9mo ago
I don't get the Gemini 3 hype... yes it's their first usable model, but its not even close to what Opus 4.5 and GPT 5.2 can do. Maybe on Benchmarks... but I'm forced to use Gemini at work everyday, while I use Opus 4.5 / GPT 5.2 privately every day... and Gemini is just lacking so much wit, creativity and multi-step problem solving skills compared to Opus. Not to mention that Gemini CLI is a pain to use - after getting used to the smoothness of Claude Code. Am I alone with this?
- falloutx 9mo ago
  Dont use it on gemini.google.com, but instead try it on aistudio.google.com. Model may be the same but the agent on aistudio makes it much better when it comes to generating code. Still jules.google.com is far behind in terms of actual coding agents which you can run in command line. Google as always has over engineered their stuff to make it confusing for end users.
  - IncreasePosts 9mo ago
    I don't understand...let's say I have it build some code for me, am I supposed to copy all those files out to my file system and then test it out? And then if I make changes to the source, I need to copy the source back in to a studio/(or canvas in Gemini)?
    - dkdcio 9mo ago
      there is the Gemini CLI, but I am aware of people doing exactly what you’re describing (which I find ridiculous but if it works it works I guess). some people have CLI tools for turning their entire repo into one big Markdown file or similar to copy over
      - patates 9mo ago
        That's me! I used to do it with repomix and turned the whole codebase into a giant xml file. Worked really great, and I have a script that just takes the aistudio output and writes all the generated files. But, after using Claude Code with Opus 4.5, it's IMHO not worth it anymore. I mean it IS competitive, but the experience of Claude Code is so nice and it slightly edges out Gemini in coding even. If gemini cli were as nice as claude code, I'd have never subscribed to the claude max plan though.
motbus3 9mo ago
I would add that openai is doing such a poor job at every aspect. Before this gpt nonsense they were such an aspiration for a better world. They quickly turned around, slayer core people from its structure and solely focus on capitalising that they seem to be stuck on dead waters. I dont see any reasons to use gpt5 at all.
keithgroves 9mo ago
I like using gemini because it's so much cheaper when I'm running tests on enact protocol. I ask it to build multiple tools and let it run.
mbrumlow 9mo ago
lol, the story Disney did not make. Just like the Disney movie, no touchy the Gemini.
edg5000 9mo ago
Is Gemini 3 still having all these bugs in the software around it? The model is great, but I had all these little bugs (billing issues, attachment not accesible by the model, countless other issues). Then there is the CLI; I always got "model is overloaded" errors even after trying weekly for a while. I found Google has this complex priority system; their bigger customers get priority (how much you spend determines queue prio). Anybody did some serious work with gemini-cli? Is it at Opus level?
theturtletalks 9mo ago
All of this seems like manufactured hype for Gemini. I use GPT-5.2, Opus 4.5, and Gemini 3 flash and pro with Droid CLI and Gemini is consistently the worst. It gets stuck in loops, wants to wipe projects when it can’t figure out the problem, and still fails to call tools consistently (sometimes the whole thread is corrupted and you can’t rewind and use another model). Terminal Bench supports my findings, GPT-5.2 and Opus 4.5 are consistently ahead. Only Junie CLI (Jetbrains exclusive) with Gemini 3 Flash scores somewhat close to the others. It’s also why Ampcode made Gemini the default model and quickly back tracked when all of these issues came to light.
- petesergeant 9mo ago
  Claude for writing the code, Codex for checking the code, Gemini for when you want to look at a pretty terminal UI.
  - j45 9mo ago
    Gemini is pretty decent at ingesting and understanding large codebases before providing it to Claude.
- alex1138 9mo ago
  I'm pretty high on Claude, though not an expert on coding or LLMs at all I'm naturally inclined to dislike Google from what they censor, what they consider misinformation, and just, I don't know, some of the projects they run (many good things, but also many dead projects and lying to people)
- AlexCoventry 9mo ago
  https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
mythz 9mo ago
Gemini CLI is too slow to be useful, kind of surprised it was even offered and marketed given how painful it is to use. I thought it'd have to be damaging to the Gemini brand to get people to try it out, suffer painful UX then immediately stop using it. (Using it from Australia may also contribute to its slow perf) Antigravity was also painful to use at launch where more queries failed then succeeded, however they've basically solved that now to the point where it's become my most used editor/IDE where I've yet to hit a quota limit, despite only being on the $20/mo plan - even when using Gemini 3 Pro as the default model. I also can't recall seeing any failed service responses after a month of full-time usage. It's not the fastest model, but very happy with its high quality output. I expected to upgrade to a Claude Code Max plan after leaving Augment Code, but given how good Antigravity is now for its low cost, I've switched to it as my primary full-time coding assistant. Still paying for GitHub Copilot / Claude Pro for general VS Code and CC terminal usage, but definitely getting the most value of out my Gemini AI Pro sub. Note this is only for development, docs and other work product. For API usage in products, I primarily lean on the cheaper OSS chinese models, primarily MiniMax 2.1 for tool calling or GLM 4.7/KimiK2/DeepSeek when extra intelligence is needed (at slower perf). Gemini Flash for analyzing Image, Audio & PDFs. Also find Nano Banana/Pro (Gemini Flash Image) to consistently generate the highest quality images vs GPT 1.5/SDXL,HiDream,Flux,ZImage,Qwen, which apparently my Pro sub includes up to 1000/day for Nano Banana or 100/day for Pro?? [1], so it's hard to justify using anything else. If Gemini 3 Pro was a bit faster and Flash a bit cheaper (API Usage), I could easily see myself switching to Gemini for everything. If future releases get smarter, faster whilst remaining aggressively priced, in the future - I expect I will. [1] https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/16275805?hl=en https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/16275805?hl=en
- Aurornis 9mo ago
  Your first point > kind of surprised it was even offered and marketed given how painful it is to use. I thought it'd have to be damaging to the Gemini brand to get people to try it out, suffer painful UX then immediately stop using it. is immediately explain by your second point > Antigravity was also painful to use at launch where more queries failed then succeeded, however they've basically solved that now to the point where it's become my most used editor/IDE Switching tools is easy right now. Some people pick a tool and stick with it, but it's common to jump from one to the other. Many of us have the lowest tier subscriptions from a couple companies at the same time so we can jump between tools all the time.
KellyCriterion 9mo ago
my guess is the following: Google can afford to run Gemini for a looong time without any ads, while OpenAI needs necessarily to bring in some revenue: So OpenAI will have to do something (or they believe they can raise money infinitely) Google can easily give Gemini without Ads to the users for the next 3 - 4 years, forcing OpenAI to cripple their product earlier with Ads because of the need for any revenue I think Google & Antropic will be one of the two winners; not sure about OpenAI, Perplexity & Co - maybe OpenAI will somehow merge with Microsoft?
- UberFly 9mo ago
  Microsoft will fund OpenAI for as long as it's needed. What is their alternative?
  - KellyCriterion 9mo ago
    You are right: How long will they do it? Id expect investors to roar up some day? Will MS fund them infinitely just for sake of "staying in the game"? According to the public numbers of users, investments, scale etc., OpenAI will need huge amounts of money in the next years, not just "another 10 billion", thats my understanding?
- jaccola 9mo ago
  I’m surprised Perplexity isn’t already dead! Makes me question my ability to evaluate the value/sticking power of these tools. (Unless it is dead if we could see DAUs…)
  - KellyCriterion 9mo ago
    The thing is: Perplexity is quite good for some things; though, it has no traction outside of tech? Most non-techies havent heard about Gemini, what Ive seen/heard. (regardless the fact that they use the Google-Search-AI-overview every day)
  - prodigycorp 9mo ago
    I’ve moved all cursory searches to google.ai – perplexity’s future is dim.
sreekanth850 9mo ago
I use Claude for Code, Gemini for research and planning and GPT for motivation.
ahartmetz 9mo ago
It's funny how companies have a stable DNA: Google comes from university research and continues to be good at research-y things, OTOH customer service...
131hn 9mo ago
Hi gemini, i’ve booked some tickets for théater. Please look into mail mailbox, schedule it in my calendar and confirm me the planning for next week. Beeing able to use natural processing my mail and calendar make me switch to gemini (app), there’s no way to achieve that with chatgpt (app) Gemini is now good enough, even if i prefer chatgpt. I only care about what i can do in the app as paying customer, even if, aside from that, i am working in IT with the SDK openrouter & MCP intégration & whatever RAG & stuff for work
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
Fricken 9mo ago
Google's ham-fisted rollout of Bard as an answer to Chat GPT's was a confounding variable because otherwise there was little reason to doubt Google's ability to compete at AI over the long-term. It's in their DNA.
nottorp 9mo ago
It did? Just 1 minute ago Gemini told me it can't use my google workspace AGAIN. The query had nothing to do with any google workspace feature. It just randomly tells me what in the middle of any "conversation".
dev1ycan 9mo ago
They didn't get an edge, they are giving gemini pro for free for a year for university emails, obviously people will use it, after a year everyone will drop it, people aren't paying for this.
neves 9mo ago
Man, this looks like a press release written by Pinchai himself. Doesn't WSJ even blush when publishing these kind of things?
- sumedh 9mo ago
  I dont think WSJ makes money from subscription fees, ads keep the lights on for journalism.
  - huhkerrf 9mo ago
    It's not that hard to find the data. Subscription fees are the great majority of WSJ overall revenue. ~$500 million of $586 million total. https://www.amediaoperator.com/news/wsj-subs-rise-as-pricing-under-review-pro-titles-drive-revenue-higher/ https://www.amediaoperator.com/news/wsj-subs-rise-as-pricing...
khalic 9mo ago
lol somebody got a fat check from google. American journalism has become such a joke
utopiah 9mo ago
Hot take : they didn't, pure players (OpenAI & Anthropics) just didn't go as fast as they claimed they would.
clickety_clack 9mo ago
It would have to be significantly better than the competition for me to use a Google product.
- verelo 9mo ago
  Everyone’s all about OpenAI v Google, meanwhile i spend 99% of my day with Claude. It’s less about it having to be a Google product personally, it just needs to be better, which outside of image editing in Gemini pro 3 image, it is not.
  - HelloMcFly 9mo ago
    I like Claude. I want to use it. But I just never feel comfortable with the usage limits at the ($20/month level at least) and it often feels like those limits are a moving, sometimes obfuscated target. Apparently something irritating happened with those limits over the holidays that convinced a colleague of mine to switch off Claude to Gemini, but I didn't dig for details.
    - pluralmonad 9mo ago
      The only thing I'm aware of is that they drastically increased limits between Christmas and new years day. Message might have even said unlimited, I don't recall precisely.
      - HelloMcFly 9mo ago
        Okay, he says they drastically (though temporarily) increased limits after surprising users with reduced limits that generated a strong reaction. This is the definition of hearsay though.
David666 9mo ago
antigravity+browser-use
David666 9mo ago
antigravity+browser use，check all rss，hot.uihash.com
hmokiguess 9mo ago
While this article is just about optics, I would say the comments here about how the coding agents fare fail to realize we’re just a niche when compared to the actual consumer product that is the Chatbots for the average user. My mom is not gonna use Claude Code, it doesn’t matter to her. We, on Hacker News, don’t represent the general population.
- lukev 9mo ago
  Claude Code purportedly has over a billion dollars in revenue. In terms of economic value, coding agents are definitely one of the top-line uses of LLMs.
  - hmokiguess 9mo ago
    Sure, I don’t disagree, but a fact remains that 1B is less than 10% of OpenAI’s revenue with ChatGPT and its 700M+ user base. Coding agents are important, they matter, my comment is that this article isn’t about that, it’s about the other side of the market.
    - raw_anon_1111 9mo ago
      And OprnAI will never be worth its current valuation or be able to keep its spending commitments based on $20/month subscriptions
  - Supermancho 9mo ago
    Claude has been measurably worse over other models, in my experience. This alone makes me doubt the number. That and Anthropic has not released official public financial statements, so I'll just assume it's the same kind of hand waving heavily leveraged companies tend to do. I actually for for ChatGPT and my company pays for Copilot (which is meh). Edit: Given other community opinions, I don't feel I'm saying anything controversial. I have noted HN readers tend to be overly bullish on it for some reason.
    - perardi 9mo ago
dylan604 9mo ago
What CRT standard is this meant to be emulating? It can't be NTSC, it's too clean. Red would never display that cleanly. Red was infamous for bleeding as the saturation increased. Never had much experience with True PAL in that I've only ever seen PAL at 60Hz so I'm not sure if had the same bleeding red issue. It's these kinds of details that cab really set your yet another emulator apart
- ceejayoz 9mo ago
  Wrong thread?
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - dylan604 9mo ago
    Oops. yes. problem of having too many tabs open before caffeine correct location: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544042
m348e912 9mo ago
Gemini 3 is great, I have moved from gpt and haven't looked back. However, like many great models, I suspect they're expensive to run and eventually Google will nerf the model once it gains enough traction, either by distillation, quantizing, or smaller context windows in order to stop bleeding money. Here is a report (whether true or not) of it happening: https://www.reddit.com/r/GeminiAI/comments/1q6ecwy/gemini_30_has_been_nerfed_big_time/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GeminiAI/comments/1q6ecwy/gemini_30...
- an0malous 9mo ago
  Yeah that’s textbook enshittification, it’s inevitable
- dalenw 9mo ago
  While I don't use Gemini, I'm betting they'll end up being the cheapest in the future because Google is developing the entire stack, instead of relying on GPUs. I think that puts them in a much better position than other companies like OpenAI. https://cloud.google.com/tpu https://cloud.google.com/tpu
outside1234 9mo ago
Gemini is amazing. I switched to it and haven't looked back at ChatGPT. Very fast, very accurate, and pulls on the whole set of knowledge Google has from search.
jacooper 9mo ago
If only they could figure out how to fiz the hallucination issues in gemini models...
dosinga 9mo ago
Google-as-the-new-Microsoft feels about right. Windows 1 was a curiosity, 2 was “ok”, and 3.x is where it started to really win. Same story with IE: early versions were a joke, then it became “good enough” + distribution did the rest. Gemini 3 feels like Google’s “Windows 3 / IE4 moment”: not necessarily everyone’s favorite yet, but finally solid enough that the default placement starts to matter. If you are the incumbent you don't need to be all that much better. Just good enough and you win by default. We'll all end up with Gemini 6 (IE 6, Windows XP) and then we'll have something to complain about.
SirMaster 9mo ago
Why wouldn't google do well? They have one of the best data sources, which is a pretty big factor. Also they have plenty of money, and talented engineers, and tensor chips, etc.
ath3nd 9mo ago
[dead]

236 points by jbredeche 9mo ago

84729839278392 9mo ago

[dead]

byyoung3 9mo ago

I think Gemini is still far behind.

lukebechtel 9mo ago
why?
- AlienRobot 9mo ago
  I'm not OP but I tried to ask it today to explain to me how proxies work, and it felt like it couldn't give me an answer that it couldn't attribute to a link. While that sounds good on paper, the problem is that no matter what you ask, you end up with very similar answers because it has less freedom to generate text. While on the other hand, even if attributes everything to a link, there is no guarantee that link actually says what the LLM is telling you it says, so it's just the worse of both worlds. ChatGPT on the other hand was able to reformulate the explanation until I understood the part I was struggling with, namely what prevents a proxy from simply passing its own public key as the website's public key. It did so without citing anything.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
  - electroglyph 9mo ago
    did it tell you how smart your questions were, too?
AshamedCaptain 9mo ago
Maybe this week it is.
nemo 9mo ago
I did some tests with heavily math oriented programming using ChatGPT and Gemini to rubber-duck (not agentic), going over C performance tuning, checking C code for possible optimizations, going over math oriented code and number theory, and working on optimizing threading, memory throughput, etc. to make the thing go faster, then benchmarking runs of the updated code. Gemini was by far better than ChatGPT in this domain. I was able to test changes by benchmarking. For my use case it was night and day, Gemini's advice generally quite strong and was useful to significantly improve benchmarked performance, ChatGPT was far less useful for this use case. What will work for you will depend on your use case, how well your prompting is tuned to the system you're using, and who knows what other factors, but I have a lot of benchmarks that are clear evidence of the opposite of your experience.
- CamperBob2 9mo ago
  Which models? It's completely uninformative to say you compared "ChatGPT" and "Gemini." Those are both just brand names under which several different models are offered, ranging from slow-witted to scary-smart.

shimman 9mo ago

Being a monopoly worth trillions while having enough BUs to subsidize anything you can imagine does have its perks.

asa400 9mo ago
Additionally, they have built-in distribution and integration for their products. I don’t know how folks don’t see that as a massive advantage. It’s like Microsoft and Internet Explorer in the 90s but on a much larger scale both in the breadth (number of distribution channels) and depth (market share of those channels in their respective verticals).
- maxkfranz 9mo ago
  That's true. It's also a fine line to walk for Google. Google has recently received regulatory pressure, for instance, just like Microsoft had trouble in the late 90s.
paxys 9mo ago
Didn't work for Meta
- blitzar 9mo ago
  Skill issue.
- ajross 9mo ago
  Or Apple. Also Microsoft who were the ones bankrolling OpenAI before it started floating on its own equity. In point of fact money to throw at AI development is essentially free, not one of the big players sustains itself on income. Investors are throwing every dollar they have at everyone with a usable pitch. Whatever advantages Google had, financial stability is way, way down the list. For better theories, look to "Proven Leader at Scaling Datacenters" and "Decoupled from the CUDA Cartel via being an early moving on custom AI hardware".
- shimman 9mo ago
  The issue with Meta is entirely confined to a single individual, Zuckerberg.

binarymax 9mo ago

This reads like a paid post from Google.

almosthere 9mo ago
This reads like a paid comment from OpenAI.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- binarymax 9mo ago
  It most certainly is not.
zaphirplane 9mo ago
There are an increasing number of breathless Gemini fans posting

cmiles8 9mo ago

A bit of PR puffery, but it is fair to say that between Gemini and others it’s now been clearly demonstrated that OpenAI doesn’t have any clear moat.

amelius 9mo ago
If the bubble doesn't burst in the next few days, then this is clearly wrong.
- Octoth0rpe 9mo ago
  Out of curiosity, why that specific timeframe? is there a significant unveiling supposed to happen? Something CES related?
- willparks 9mo ago
  Next few days? Might be a bit longer than that.
  - amelius 9mo ago
    Why? They said "clearly demonstrated". If it is so clear, then investors will want to pull their money out.
    - esafak 9mo ago
      What if all investors don't agree with this article?
    - array_key_first 9mo ago
      Most investors are dumb as rocks, or, at least, don't know shit about what they're investing in. I mean, I don't know squat about chemical manufacturing but I have some investment in that. It's not about who's the best, it's about where the market is. Dogpiling on growing companies is a proven way to make a lot of money, so people do it, and it's accelerated by index funds. The REAL people supporting Google and Nvidia isn't wallstreet, it's your 401K.

qsort 9mo ago

It seems to me like this is yet another instance of just reading vibes, like when GPT 5 was underwhelming and people were like "AI is dead", or people thinking Google was behind last year when 2.5 pro was perfectly fine, or overhyping stuff that makes no sense like Sora. Wasn't the consensus that 3.0 isn't that great compared to how it benchmarks? I don't even know anymore, I feel I'm going insane.

SirensOfTitan 9mo ago
I have a weakly held conviction (because it is based on my personal qualitative opinion) that Google aggressively and quietly quantizes (or reduces compute/thinking on) their models a little while after release. Gemini 2.5 Pro 3-25 benchmark was by far my favorite model this year, and I noticed an extreme drop off of quality responses around the beginning of May when they pointed that benchmark to a newer version (I didn't even know they did this until I started searching for why the model degraded so much). I noticed a similar effect with Gemini 3.0: it felt fantastic over the first couple weeks of use, and now the responses I get from it are noticeably more mediocre. I'm under the impression all of the flagship AI shops do these kinds of quiet changes after a release to save on costs (Anthropic seems like the most honest player in my experience), and Google does it more aggressively than either OpenAI or Anthropic.
- trvz 9mo ago
  It's the fate of people relying on cloud services, including the complete removal of old LLM versions. If you want stability you go local.
  - gardnr 9mo ago
    Which models do you use locally?
- vedmakk 9mo ago
  I can definitely confirm this from my experience. Gemini 3 feels even worse than GPT-4o right now. I dont understand the hype or why OpenAI would need a red alert because of it? Both Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2 are much more pleasant to use.

wewewedxfgdf 9mo ago

I feel like Gemini made a giant leap forward in its coding capabilities and then in the past week or so it's become shit again - constantly dropping most of the code from my program when I ask it to add a feature - it's gone from incredible to basically useless.

vedmakk 9mo ago
Same experience here. Shame.

bookman10 9mo ago

They're about the same as far as I can tell.

djoldman 9mo ago

Alternate link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/how-google-got-its-groove-back-and-edged-ahead-of-openai/ar-AA1THFBj https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/how-google-got-its-gro...

handelaar 9mo ago

https://archive.is/TyJ8q https://archive.is/TyJ8q

HackerThemAll 9mo ago

The best decision for Google happened like 10 years ago when they started manufacturing their own silicon for crunching neural nets. No matter if they had a really good crystal ball back then, smart people, time travel machine or just luck, it pays for them now. They don't need to participate in that Ponzi scheme that OpenAI, Nvidia and Microsoft created, and they don't need to wait in line to buy Nvidia cards.

jeffbee 9mo ago
It had to have been launched longer ago than that because their first public-facing, TPU-using generative product was Inbox Smart Reply, which launched more than 10 years ago. Add to that however much time had to pass up to the point where they had the hardware in production. I think the genesis of the project must have been 12-15 years ago.
- dgacmu 9mo ago
  About 12. First deployed mid 2015.
- jillesvangurp 9mo ago
  The acquired podcast did a nice episode on the history of AI in Google recently going back all the way to when they were trying to do the "I feel lucky", early versions of translate, etc. All of which laid the ground work for adding AI features to Google and running them at Google scale. That started early in the history of Google when they did everything on CPUs still. The transition to using GPU accelerated algorithms at scale started happening pretty early in Google around 2009/2010 when they started doing stuff with voice and images. This started with Google just buying a few big GPUs for their R&D and then suddenly appearing as a big customer for NVidia who up to then had no clue that they were going to be an AI company. The internal work on TPUs started around 2013. They deployed the first versions around 2015 and have been iterating on those since then. Interestingly, OpenAI was founded around the same time. OpenAI has a moat as well in terms of brand recognition and diversified hardware supplier deals and funding. Nvidia is no longer the only game in town and Intel and AMD are in scope as well. Google's TPUs give them a short term advantage but hardware capabilities are becoming a commodity long term. OpenAI and Google need to demonstrate value to end users, not cost optimizations. This is about where the many billions on AI subscription spending is going to go. Google might be catching up, but OpenAI is the clear leader in terms of paid subscriptions. Google has been chasing different products for the last fifteen years in terms of always trying to catch up with the latest and greatest in terms messaging, social networking, and now AI features. They are doing a lot of copycat products; not a lot of original ones. It's not a safe bet that this will go differently for them this time.

zeroonetwothree 9mo ago

I don't think it's really "ahead" but it's pretty close now. There's not that big a difference among the SOTA models, they all have their pros/cons.

mcast 9mo ago
It’s incredibly impressive to see a large company with over 30x as many employees (or 2x if you compare with GDM) than OAI step back into the AI race compared to where they were with Bard a few years ago. Google has proved it doesn’t want to be the next IBM or Microsoft.
- jasonfarnon 9mo ago
  "the next IBM or Microsoft." Actually Microsoft has also shown it doesn't want to be the next IBM. I think at this point Apple is the one where I have trouble seeing a long-term plan.
  - gbear605 9mo ago
    Microsoft was sort of showing that a year ago, and then spent the whole last year showing everyone that they're just another IBM.
    - grumbelbart2 9mo ago
      It probably depends on what "The next IBM" means for people. Microsoft is so deeply embedded into companies right now that for larger cooperation it's practically impossible to get rid of them, and their cloud-driven strategy is very profitable.
      - gbear605 9mo ago
        IBM still makes a lot of money from large corporations that depend on them. But yet…
- culi 9mo ago

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

sxp 9mo ago

> Naina Raisinghani, 00 needed a name for the new tool to complete the upload. It was 2:30 a.m., though, and nobody was around. So she just made one up, a mashup of two nicknames friends had given her: Nano Banana. Ah, that explains the silly name for such an impressive tool. I guess it's more a more Googley name than what would have otherwise been chosen: Google Gemini Image Pro Red for Workspace.

jofzar 9mo ago
I honestly love the name nano banana, it's stupid as hell, but it's a bit of joy to say specially with how corporate everything is name wised these days.
- underdeserver 9mo ago
  Whimsical.
- Hammershaft 9mo ago
  I agree, it's a great silly name that immediately jumped out at me because it felt so distant from the focus tested names out of marketing that have become the standard today.
cmrdporcupine 9mo ago
I like that it's evidence that there's still some remnants of the old Google culture there.
perardi 9mo ago
Strongly disagree. Google, OpenAI, and Microsoft all have a very confusing product naming strategy where it’s all lumped under Gemini/ChatGPT/Copilot, and the individual product names are not memorable and really quite obscure. (What does Codex do again?) Nano Banana doesn’t tell you what the product does, but you sure remember the name. It really rolls off the tongue, and it looks really catchy on social media.

paulpauper 9mo ago

Gemini is great because of far fewer rate limits compared to Open AI . When I hit a rate limit on Open AI, I switch to gemini.

kelseyfrog 9mo ago
Why not start with Gemini then?

vedmakk 9mo ago

I don't get the Gemini 3 hype... yes it's their first usable model, but its not even close to what Opus 4.5 and GPT 5.2 can do. Maybe on Benchmarks... but I'm forced to use Gemini at work everyday, while I use Opus 4.5 / GPT 5.2 privately every day... and Gemini is just lacking so much wit, creativity and multi-step problem solving skills compared to Opus. Not to mention that Gemini CLI is a pain to use - after getting used to the smoothness of Claude Code. Am I alone with this?

falloutx 9mo ago
Dont use it on gemini.google.com, but instead try it on aistudio.google.com. Model may be the same but the agent on aistudio makes it much better when it comes to generating code. Still jules.google.com is far behind in terms of actual coding agents which you can run in command line. Google as always has over engineered their stuff to make it confusing for end users.
- IncreasePosts 9mo ago
  I don't understand...let's say I have it build some code for me, am I supposed to copy all those files out to my file system and then test it out? And then if I make changes to the source, I need to copy the source back in to a studio/(or canvas in Gemini)?
  - dkdcio 9mo ago
    there is the Gemini CLI, but I am aware of people doing exactly what you’re describing (which I find ridiculous but if it works it works I guess). some people have CLI tools for turning their entire repo into one big Markdown file or similar to copy over
    - patates 9mo ago
      That's me! I used to do it with repomix and turned the whole codebase into a giant xml file. Worked really great, and I have a script that just takes the aistudio output and writes all the generated files. But, after using Claude Code with Opus 4.5, it's IMHO not worth it anymore. I mean it IS competitive, but the experience of Claude Code is so nice and it slightly edges out Gemini in coding even. If gemini cli were as nice as claude code, I'd have never subscribed to the claude max plan though.

motbus3 9mo ago

I would add that openai is doing such a poor job at every aspect. Before this gpt nonsense they were such an aspiration for a better world. They quickly turned around, slayer core people from its structure and solely focus on capitalising that they seem to be stuck on dead waters. I dont see any reasons to use gpt5 at all.

keithgroves 9mo ago

I like using gemini because it's so much cheaper when I'm running tests on enact protocol. I ask it to build multiple tools and let it run.

mbrumlow 9mo ago

lol, the story Disney did not make. Just like the Disney movie, no touchy the Gemini.

edg5000 9mo ago

Is Gemini 3 still having all these bugs in the software around it? The model is great, but I had all these little bugs (billing issues, attachment not accesible by the model, countless other issues). Then there is the CLI; I always got "model is overloaded" errors even after trying weekly for a while. I found Google has this complex priority system; their bigger customers get priority (how much you spend determines queue prio). Anybody did some serious work with gemini-cli? Is it at Opus level?

theturtletalks 9mo ago

All of this seems like manufactured hype for Gemini. I use GPT-5.2, Opus 4.5, and Gemini 3 flash and pro with Droid CLI and Gemini is consistently the worst. It gets stuck in loops, wants to wipe projects when it can’t figure out the problem, and still fails to call tools consistently (sometimes the whole thread is corrupted and you can’t rewind and use another model). Terminal Bench supports my findings, GPT-5.2 and Opus 4.5 are consistently ahead. Only Junie CLI (Jetbrains exclusive) with Gemini 3 Flash scores somewhat close to the others. It’s also why Ampcode made Gemini the default model and quickly back tracked when all of these issues came to light.

petesergeant 9mo ago
Claude for writing the code, Codex for checking the code, Gemini for when you want to look at a pretty terminal UI.
- j45 9mo ago
  Gemini is pretty decent at ingesting and understanding large codebases before providing it to Claude.
alex1138 9mo ago
I'm pretty high on Claude, though not an expert on coding or LLMs at all I'm naturally inclined to dislike Google from what they censor, what they consider misinformation, and just, I don't know, some of the projects they run (many good things, but also many dead projects and lying to people)
AlexCoventry 9mo ago
https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html https://paulgraham.com/submarine.html

mythz 9mo ago

Gemini CLI is too slow to be useful, kind of surprised it was even offered and marketed given how painful it is to use. I thought it'd have to be damaging to the Gemini brand to get people to try it out, suffer painful UX then immediately stop using it. (Using it from Australia may also contribute to its slow perf) Antigravity was also painful to use at launch where more queries failed then succeeded, however they've basically solved that now to the point where it's become my most used editor/IDE where I've yet to hit a quota limit, despite only being on the $20/mo plan - even when using Gemini 3 Pro as the default model. I also can't recall seeing any failed service responses after a month of full-time usage. It's not the fastest model, but very happy with its high quality output. I expected to upgrade to a Claude Code Max plan after leaving Augment Code, but given how good Antigravity is now for its low cost, I've switched to it as my primary full-time coding assistant. Still paying for GitHub Copilot / Claude Pro for general VS Code and CC terminal usage, but definitely getting the most value of out my Gemini AI Pro sub. Note this is only for development, docs and other work product. For API usage in products, I primarily lean on the cheaper OSS chinese models, primarily MiniMax 2.1 for tool calling or GLM 4.7/KimiK2/DeepSeek when extra intelligence is needed (at slower perf). Gemini Flash for analyzing Image, Audio & PDFs. Also find Nano Banana/Pro (Gemini Flash Image) to consistently generate the highest quality images vs GPT 1.5/SDXL,HiDream,Flux,ZImage,Qwen, which apparently my Pro sub includes up to 1000/day for Nano Banana or 100/day for Pro?? [1], so it's hard to justify using anything else. If Gemini 3 Pro was a bit faster and Flash a bit cheaper (API Usage), I could easily see myself switching to Gemini for everything. If future releases get smarter, faster whilst remaining aggressively priced, in the future - I expect I will. [1] https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/16275805?hl=en https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/16275805?hl=en

Aurornis 9mo ago
Your first point > kind of surprised it was even offered and marketed given how painful it is to use. I thought it'd have to be damaging to the Gemini brand to get people to try it out, suffer painful UX then immediately stop using it. is immediately explain by your second point > Antigravity was also painful to use at launch where more queries failed then succeeded, however they've basically solved that now to the point where it's become my most used editor/IDE Switching tools is easy right now. Some people pick a tool and stick with it, but it's common to jump from one to the other. Many of us have the lowest tier subscriptions from a couple companies at the same time so we can jump between tools all the time.

KellyCriterion 9mo ago

my guess is the following: Google can afford to run Gemini for a looong time without any ads, while OpenAI needs necessarily to bring in some revenue: So OpenAI will have to do something (or they believe they can raise money infinitely) Google can easily give Gemini without Ads to the users for the next 3 - 4 years, forcing OpenAI to cripple their product earlier with Ads because of the need for any revenue I think Google & Antropic will be one of the two winners; not sure about OpenAI, Perplexity & Co - maybe OpenAI will somehow merge with Microsoft?

UberFly 9mo ago
Microsoft will fund OpenAI for as long as it's needed. What is their alternative?
- KellyCriterion 9mo ago
  You are right: How long will they do it? Id expect investors to roar up some day? Will MS fund them infinitely just for sake of "staying in the game"? According to the public numbers of users, investments, scale etc., OpenAI will need huge amounts of money in the next years, not just "another 10 billion", thats my understanding?
jaccola 9mo ago
I’m surprised Perplexity isn’t already dead! Makes me question my ability to evaluate the value/sticking power of these tools. (Unless it is dead if we could see DAUs…)
- KellyCriterion 9mo ago
  The thing is: Perplexity is quite good for some things; though, it has no traction outside of tech? Most non-techies havent heard about Gemini, what Ive seen/heard. (regardless the fact that they use the Google-Search-AI-overview every day)
- prodigycorp 9mo ago
  I’ve moved all cursory searches to google.ai – perplexity’s future is dim.

sreekanth850 9mo ago

I use Claude for Code, Gemini for research and planning and GPT for motivation.

ahartmetz 9mo ago

It's funny how companies have a stable DNA: Google comes from university research and continues to be good at research-y things, OTOH customer service...

131hn 9mo ago

Hi gemini, i’ve booked some tickets for théater. Please look into mail mailbox, schedule it in my calendar and confirm me the planning for next week. Beeing able to use natural processing my mail and calendar make me switch to gemini (app), there’s no way to achieve that with chatgpt (app) Gemini is now good enough, even if i prefer chatgpt. I only care about what i can do in the app as paying customer, even if, aside from that, i am working in IT with the SDK openrouter & MCP intégration & whatever RAG & stuff for work

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

Fricken 9mo ago

Google's ham-fisted rollout of Bard as an answer to Chat GPT's was a confounding variable because otherwise there was little reason to doubt Google's ability to compete at AI over the long-term. It's in their DNA.

nottorp 9mo ago

It did? Just 1 minute ago Gemini told me it can't use my google workspace AGAIN. The query had nothing to do with any google workspace feature. It just randomly tells me what in the middle of any "conversation".

dev1ycan 9mo ago

They didn't get an edge, they are giving gemini pro for free for a year for university emails, obviously people will use it, after a year everyone will drop it, people aren't paying for this.

neves 9mo ago

Man, this looks like a press release written by Pinchai himself. Doesn't WSJ even blush when publishing these kind of things?

sumedh 9mo ago
I dont think WSJ makes money from subscription fees, ads keep the lights on for journalism.
- huhkerrf 9mo ago
  It's not that hard to find the data. Subscription fees are the great majority of WSJ overall revenue. ~$500 million of $586 million total. https://www.amediaoperator.com/news/wsj-subs-rise-as-pricing-under-review-pro-titles-drive-revenue-higher/ https://www.amediaoperator.com/news/wsj-subs-rise-as-pricing...

khalic 9mo ago

lol somebody got a fat check from google. American journalism has become such a joke

utopiah 9mo ago

Hot take : they didn't, pure players (OpenAI & Anthropics) just didn't go as fast as they claimed they would.

clickety_clack 9mo ago

It would have to be significantly better than the competition for me to use a Google product.

verelo 9mo ago
Everyone’s all about OpenAI v Google, meanwhile i spend 99% of my day with Claude. It’s less about it having to be a Google product personally, it just needs to be better, which outside of image editing in Gemini pro 3 image, it is not.
- HelloMcFly 9mo ago
  I like Claude. I want to use it. But I just never feel comfortable with the usage limits at the ($20/month level at least) and it often feels like those limits are a moving, sometimes obfuscated target. Apparently something irritating happened with those limits over the holidays that convinced a colleague of mine to switch off Claude to Gemini, but I didn't dig for details.
  - pluralmonad 9mo ago
    The only thing I'm aware of is that they drastically increased limits between Christmas and new years day. Message might have even said unlimited, I don't recall precisely.
    - HelloMcFly 9mo ago
      Okay, he says they drastically (though temporarily) increased limits after surprising users with reduced limits that generated a strong reaction. This is the definition of hearsay though.

David666 9mo ago

antigravity+browser-use

David666 9mo ago

antigravity+browser use，check all rss，hot.uihash.com

hmokiguess 9mo ago

While this article is just about optics, I would say the comments here about how the coding agents fare fail to realize we’re just a niche when compared to the actual consumer product that is the Chatbots for the average user. My mom is not gonna use Claude Code, it doesn’t matter to her. We, on Hacker News, don’t represent the general population.

lukev 9mo ago
Claude Code purportedly has over a billion dollars in revenue. In terms of economic value, coding agents are definitely one of the top-line uses of LLMs.
- hmokiguess 9mo ago
  Sure, I don’t disagree, but a fact remains that 1B is less than 10% of OpenAI’s revenue with ChatGPT and its 700M+ user base. Coding agents are important, they matter, my comment is that this article isn’t about that, it’s about the other side of the market.
  - raw_anon_1111 9mo ago
    And OprnAI will never be worth its current valuation or be able to keep its spending commitments based on $20/month subscriptions
- Supermancho 9mo ago
  Claude has been measurably worse over other models, in my experience. This alone makes me doubt the number. That and Anthropic has not released official public financial statements, so I'll just assume it's the same kind of hand waving heavily leveraged companies tend to do. I actually for for ChatGPT and my company pays for Copilot (which is meh). Edit: Given other community opinions, I don't feel I'm saying anything controversial. I have noted HN readers tend to be overly bullish on it for some reason.
  - perardi 9mo ago

dylan604 9mo ago

What CRT standard is this meant to be emulating? It can't be NTSC, it's too clean. Red would never display that cleanly. Red was infamous for bleeding as the saturation increased. Never had much experience with True PAL in that I've only ever seen PAL at 60Hz so I'm not sure if had the same bleeding red issue. It's these kinds of details that cab really set your yet another emulator apart

ceejayoz 9mo ago
Wrong thread?
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
- dylan604 9mo ago
  Oops. yes. problem of having too many tabs open before caffeine correct location: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544042

m348e912 9mo ago

Gemini 3 is great, I have moved from gpt and haven't looked back. However, like many great models, I suspect they're expensive to run and eventually Google will nerf the model once it gains enough traction, either by distillation, quantizing, or smaller context windows in order to stop bleeding money. Here is a report (whether true or not) of it happening: https://www.reddit.com/r/GeminiAI/comments/1q6ecwy/gemini_30_has_been_nerfed_big_time/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GeminiAI/comments/1q6ecwy/gemini_30...

an0malous 9mo ago
Yeah that’s textbook enshittification, it’s inevitable
dalenw 9mo ago
While I don't use Gemini, I'm betting they'll end up being the cheapest in the future because Google is developing the entire stack, instead of relying on GPUs. I think that puts them in a much better position than other companies like OpenAI. https://cloud.google.com/tpu https://cloud.google.com/tpu

outside1234 9mo ago

Gemini is amazing. I switched to it and haven't looked back at ChatGPT. Very fast, very accurate, and pulls on the whole set of knowledge Google has from search.

jacooper 9mo ago

If only they could figure out how to fiz the hallucination issues in gemini models...

dosinga 9mo ago

Google-as-the-new-Microsoft feels about right. Windows 1 was a curiosity, 2 was “ok”, and 3.x is where it started to really win. Same story with IE: early versions were a joke, then it became “good enough” + distribution did the rest. Gemini 3 feels like Google’s “Windows 3 / IE4 moment”: not necessarily everyone’s favorite yet, but finally solid enough that the default placement starts to matter. If you are the incumbent you don't need to be all that much better. Just good enough and you win by default. We'll all end up with Gemini 6 (IE 6, Windows XP) and then we'll have something to complain about.

SirMaster 9mo ago

Why wouldn't google do well? They have one of the best data sources, which is a pretty big factor. Also they have plenty of money, and talented engineers, and tensor chips, etc.

ath3nd 9mo ago

[dead]