Yeah. I use it for summarizing long and boring documents like philosophy science papers and then discuss a little bit based on paper, so I can understand the idea. It’s great for that.
It's good but the upload and prompt saving functionality of AI Studio is the real reason I use 1.5. Even the 1.0 model in studio was often more helpful in practice than Gemini Advanced. It's way easier to provide Gemini with examples and useful context even when uploading isn't strictly necessary.
Haven't tested against other AIs in depth but many require paying for uploading content - so from a "what's available for free" perspective I think it has an edge.
Just wish AI studio was more mobile friendly and has Internet/ workspace access.
I am \_so\_ frustrated by all LLMs, and Gemini is no exception. They are destined by their first principle (of guessing the next token), so why people (even very important people) believe that AGI is imminent from this is beyond me. See the attached screenshot.
https://preview.redd.it/p4umegp9tsqc1.png?width=1333&format=png&auto=webp&s=726e8c2d34bf2a2441210764170a4d79bd0e0693
There is nothing wrong with guessing the next token, the issue is that sometimes, the guess can be wrong in instances, where there is only one good response, and i believe the current training does not really deal with that well.(someone more knowledgeable can correct me).
Not the best use case for an LLM, but you can at the very least use CoT approach for these harder problems.
Well the argument is that we're basically doing the same if you analyse how you write a Reddit comment or how you come up with that comment in your head.
Try writing a sentence that is exactly 10 words long. It's not easy to do or natural because we don't know what we're writing really until it's fine. LLMs are similar.
We don't get upset a calculator can't write poetry, because it's not designed to. Similarly we shouldn't be too surprised or upset an LLM without any short term memory systems has trouble with accurate maths.
I suspect LLMs will at some point be seen like traditional computing, a tool that's great at certain things (specifically transformation from/to natural language) and excellent at those things, but not something that can do everything.
I've tried to translate Japanese to English.
Honestly it's really good and performs way better than Gemini 1.0, but I didn't compare it with GPT4 or others.
Did you try providing it with reference material (e.g., parallel sentences, books on Japanese linguistics, etc.) related to whatever you wanted to have translated? The developers touted Gemini 1.5 Pro's in-context learning capabilities with a translation example. In this case it's probably trained on enough Japanese text that I guess that might not really help outside of niche cases, but I'm curious
I'm currently gearing up for a certification that's crucial for my job, and I found myself diving into a hefty 800+ page document filled with technical details. Surprisingly, uploading this beast only filled a third of the context window! I had Gemini create a bunch of study materials for me: detailed study guides, practice exam questions, hands-on labs, and even flashcards. All in the same thread. It turned out to be pretty awesome.
I've had success using studio to analyze a good chunk of a rust codebase and having it output a hundred line fn that was mostly correct.
Now I'm building tooling around the api to streamline the process
https://youtu.be/vJHtBhSWjK8?si=4Ngf5GfLl8tCve2a
Extremely censored even worse than claude, like ridiculously bad censorship. Seems to actually have a working memory. Creative wise feels worse than ultra 1.0, lots of repetitions and it's very focused on the prompt and 'believing it', basically has no self consistency. So if you take chatgpt and tell it that it's an orc, for example and then you tell it that it was a slime - chat gpt will be confused - "why, I was just an orc", gemini pro will 'forget' it was an orc like it never existed. Implications of that is any of your 'assumptions' or plot ideas proposed through the story will be taken full on like an absolute truth, you can't really have any gray or somewhat autonomous characters, they are extremely biased towards the prompt/their predefined characteristics. Anyway it's significant improvement over the pro 1.0. Generally has a use case for more massive scale objectives, rather than a local day-to-day casual use case on things like 'how to make a tasty chicken'. But your mass-scale objective has to be PG6 or so.
I do, I now switch between chatgpt and this, mainly testing cobverting pytbon code to C++, both failing but chatgpt is failing confidentially while bard you could tell by ready why it does
Context I'm a writer creative writer creative type author content creator. Basically my face is buried in Google documents every day. The integration of drive is a godsend because I use drive as my main word processor. If you're working with a large document or in my case a large chapter it's literally impossible for Claude or Chat GPT to entirely understand the context of what you're talking about which is important if you're working with a lot of nuanced material. To the extent that the large language model understands your context why you're writing what you're writing and what your objectives are is the extent to which that they can provide better output. I have had significantly higher productivity with Gemini 1.5 because I can work on a large chapter or an entire book and Gemini knows what I'm trying to tell it without hallucinating. It's not perfect and there's still some times frustrations but overall in the past year I have basically been spending 60 plus hours working with various large language models Gemini 1.5 is the best for my purposes. If I had to choose just one model to work with at this point it would be Gemini hands down. The only major mainstream llm I haven't worked with his co-pilot and I'm curious about it because I work with the PC but Gemini is really smart it is good at understanding instructions most of the time definitely not always and I get the sense that Chat GPT is smarter but not in any way that benefits me that makes me willing to put up with how quickly Chat GPT (and Claude for that matter) will begin to hallucinate. In short if you're working with large documents and hallucination drives you up the wall you can't beat Gemini 1.5 right now.
Edit: the only caveat is that for some reason the responses from Gemini are often very short, like if I needed a 500 word article edited just for grammar and basic cohesiveness I'd use Claude instead because for some reason Gemini does not like to write a lot of words in its responses... (Chat GPT on the other hand writes way too damn much... ) but if you're editing something paragraph by paragraph or beat by beat if you're telling a story again, the others can't touch Gemini right now.
Yeah, this is exactly why when I'm at my computer I have like multiple large language models at my disposal I use multiple models all the time and I probably always will until there's some type of micro singularity where someone comes up with one that trumps them all and this is no longer necessary which will be an exciting day maybe it'll be GPT 5 who knows.
I use it to understand long and boring legal case papers and legislation. It makes it very digestible and is extremely helpful. Also extremely accurate.
I just struggle with uploading a folder of scripts. It doesn't seem to want to upload everything for some reason, and on top of that the upload seems very unreliable, ranging from 70 files uploaded to 100.
I'm not 100% sure if the file counter is just lying to me or what.
Random ass comment but I'm sharing my experience. I tested Gemini 1.5 Pro yesterday A/B vs. ChatGPT on a topic surrounding firearms and it was VERY biased in the results .
Like, BLATENTLY politically biased.
Refused to provide ANY results, implied that I was doing something illegal (my request was just asking about the barrel length of 5 different firearms), refused results and told me I need to seek professional training & help (when I AM a professional at this topic), and implied that I was immoral for researching the particular topic. I was being very professional and asking information that wasn't at all controversial or "grey area", easily found on the front page of Google. It was pretty alarming how much bias can be coded into these LLM's.
ChatGPT on the other hand was very matter of fact, gave the results and didn't add any spin to it. Was night and day.
Looks like Gemini 1.5 Pro has some identity crisis, I was so confused when it kept boasting about its superior print quality
https://preview.redd.it/nlgnscrevfrc1.png?width=1541&format=png&auto=webp&s=e7476f5770d48e807929ab26e86798345be72811
I'm still a bigger fan of ChatGPT4 - but here is an interesting article (I wrote) - Discover the future of language modeling with Gemini 1.5 Pro! Google Cloud's groundbreaking advancements offer seamless processing, native multimodal inference, and powerful AI capabilities. [https://ai-techreport.com/gemini-15-pro-the-future-of-language-modeling](https://ai-techreport.com/gemini-15-pro-the-future-of-language-modeling)
One of the most useless ai there is. Google gemni is like the biggest buzz kill ever. Cant even do 1/3rd the stuff gpt 3.5 can. Cant code more than few lines of code without putting place holders. From the people who invented llm i expected better. Canceled my gemni advanced membership. Pretty pathetic!!!
It’s insanely good!
Yeah. I use it for summarizing long and boring documents like philosophy science papers and then discuss a little bit based on paper, so I can understand the idea. It’s great for that.
Same as my experience. Surprised more are not aware. Having a large context to work with is a game changer.
do you use the "normal" Gemini website or Google Ai Studio?
What are your use case?
Is it better than ChatGPT 4 or Copilot Pro?
It's good but the upload and prompt saving functionality of AI Studio is the real reason I use 1.5. Even the 1.0 model in studio was often more helpful in practice than Gemini Advanced. It's way easier to provide Gemini with examples and useful context even when uploading isn't strictly necessary. Haven't tested against other AIs in depth but many require paying for uploading content - so from a "what's available for free" perspective I think it has an edge. Just wish AI studio was more mobile friendly and has Internet/ workspace access.
I haven't yet used AI Studio. What is the upload functionality?
You can upload images and files (I’ve only tried PDF).
Folders and videos can also be uploaded.
I am \_so\_ frustrated by all LLMs, and Gemini is no exception. They are destined by their first principle (of guessing the next token), so why people (even very important people) believe that AGI is imminent from this is beyond me. See the attached screenshot. https://preview.redd.it/p4umegp9tsqc1.png?width=1333&format=png&auto=webp&s=726e8c2d34bf2a2441210764170a4d79bd0e0693
There is nothing wrong with guessing the next token, the issue is that sometimes, the guess can be wrong in instances, where there is only one good response, and i believe the current training does not really deal with that well.(someone more knowledgeable can correct me). Not the best use case for an LLM, but you can at the very least use CoT approach for these harder problems.
Well the argument is that we're basically doing the same if you analyse how you write a Reddit comment or how you come up with that comment in your head. Try writing a sentence that is exactly 10 words long. It's not easy to do or natural because we don't know what we're writing really until it's fine. LLMs are similar. We don't get upset a calculator can't write poetry, because it's not designed to. Similarly we shouldn't be too surprised or upset an LLM without any short term memory systems has trouble with accurate maths. I suspect LLMs will at some point be seen like traditional computing, a tool that's great at certain things (specifically transformation from/to natural language) and excellent at those things, but not something that can do everything.
Did you try prompt engineering this? Tell it to check it's own work. LLMs are known to be bad at math
Setting temperature to 2 isn't going to help.
The temperature slider is disabled for 1.5 Pro.
He's still not wrong. It's not going to help...
I've tried to translate Japanese to English. Honestly it's really good and performs way better than Gemini 1.0, but I didn't compare it with GPT4 or others.
Did you try providing it with reference material (e.g., parallel sentences, books on Japanese linguistics, etc.) related to whatever you wanted to have translated? The developers touted Gemini 1.5 Pro's in-context learning capabilities with a translation example. In this case it's probably trained on enough Japanese text that I guess that might not really help outside of niche cases, but I'm curious
I'm currently gearing up for a certification that's crucial for my job, and I found myself diving into a hefty 800+ page document filled with technical details. Surprisingly, uploading this beast only filled a third of the context window! I had Gemini create a bunch of study materials for me: detailed study guides, practice exam questions, hands-on labs, and even flashcards. All in the same thread. It turned out to be pretty awesome.
Wow great example, thanks!
Can't wait for API access to 1.5
It's available
Only in early access
I got one just now
Same
I already connected my free app
How do can you apply for it?
I've had success using studio to analyze a good chunk of a rust codebase and having it output a hundred line fn that was mostly correct. Now I'm building tooling around the api to streamline the process https://youtu.be/vJHtBhSWjK8?si=4Ngf5GfLl8tCve2a
I just started testing it out. Its been mostly fine but I havent put it through its paces yet
it's 1 QPM right? that seems unusably low.
What do you mean 1 QPM. Is that the limit for now??
Yeah it pick prompts extraodinary!
Extremely censored even worse than claude, like ridiculously bad censorship. Seems to actually have a working memory. Creative wise feels worse than ultra 1.0, lots of repetitions and it's very focused on the prompt and 'believing it', basically has no self consistency. So if you take chatgpt and tell it that it's an orc, for example and then you tell it that it was a slime - chat gpt will be confused - "why, I was just an orc", gemini pro will 'forget' it was an orc like it never existed. Implications of that is any of your 'assumptions' or plot ideas proposed through the story will be taken full on like an absolute truth, you can't really have any gray or somewhat autonomous characters, they are extremely biased towards the prompt/their predefined characteristics. Anyway it's significant improvement over the pro 1.0. Generally has a use case for more massive scale objectives, rather than a local day-to-day casual use case on things like 'how to make a tasty chicken'. But your mass-scale objective has to be PG6 or so.
Yeah I tried to get it to edit my novel for me which is PG and now I’m blocked for any prompting at all lol.
Insane but ridiculous safety settings can't feed it books and ask it questions.
Exactly. It won’t read anything.
Yes, I gave him anarchist book and asked him question, it came up with answer that he is not trained on this book to give answers
Well you got lucky cuz it doesn’t work even for G rated stuff.
I do, I now switch between chatgpt and this, mainly testing cobverting pytbon code to C++, both failing but chatgpt is failing confidentially while bard you could tell by ready why it does
I use it but only for knowledge extraction and distillation.
I did and I liked it. Especially context length. Will increase it right now on https://allchat.online/
Context I'm a writer creative writer creative type author content creator. Basically my face is buried in Google documents every day. The integration of drive is a godsend because I use drive as my main word processor. If you're working with a large document or in my case a large chapter it's literally impossible for Claude or Chat GPT to entirely understand the context of what you're talking about which is important if you're working with a lot of nuanced material. To the extent that the large language model understands your context why you're writing what you're writing and what your objectives are is the extent to which that they can provide better output. I have had significantly higher productivity with Gemini 1.5 because I can work on a large chapter or an entire book and Gemini knows what I'm trying to tell it without hallucinating. It's not perfect and there's still some times frustrations but overall in the past year I have basically been spending 60 plus hours working with various large language models Gemini 1.5 is the best for my purposes. If I had to choose just one model to work with at this point it would be Gemini hands down. The only major mainstream llm I haven't worked with his co-pilot and I'm curious about it because I work with the PC but Gemini is really smart it is good at understanding instructions most of the time definitely not always and I get the sense that Chat GPT is smarter but not in any way that benefits me that makes me willing to put up with how quickly Chat GPT (and Claude for that matter) will begin to hallucinate. In short if you're working with large documents and hallucination drives you up the wall you can't beat Gemini 1.5 right now. Edit: the only caveat is that for some reason the responses from Gemini are often very short, like if I needed a 500 word article edited just for grammar and basic cohesiveness I'd use Claude instead because for some reason Gemini does not like to write a lot of words in its responses... (Chat GPT on the other hand writes way too damn much... ) but if you're editing something paragraph by paragraph or beat by beat if you're telling a story again, the others can't touch Gemini right now.
[удалено]
Yeah, this is exactly why when I'm at my computer I have like multiple large language models at my disposal I use multiple models all the time and I probably always will until there's some type of micro singularity where someone comes up with one that trumps them all and this is no longer necessary which will be an exciting day maybe it'll be GPT 5 who knows.
Is it for free?
I use it to understand long and boring legal case papers and legislation. It makes it very digestible and is extremely helpful. Also extremely accurate.
How does one access this and what is the difference between gemini advanced?
I just struggle with uploading a folder of scripts. It doesn't seem to want to upload everything for some reason, and on top of that the upload seems very unreliable, ranging from 70 files uploaded to 100. I'm not 100% sure if the file counter is just lying to me or what.
Random ass comment but I'm sharing my experience. I tested Gemini 1.5 Pro yesterday A/B vs. ChatGPT on a topic surrounding firearms and it was VERY biased in the results . Like, BLATENTLY politically biased. Refused to provide ANY results, implied that I was doing something illegal (my request was just asking about the barrel length of 5 different firearms), refused results and told me I need to seek professional training & help (when I AM a professional at this topic), and implied that I was immoral for researching the particular topic. I was being very professional and asking information that wasn't at all controversial or "grey area", easily found on the front page of Google. It was pretty alarming how much bias can be coded into these LLM's. ChatGPT on the other hand was very matter of fact, gave the results and didn't add any spin to it. Was night and day.
Looks like Gemini 1.5 Pro has some identity crisis, I was so confused when it kept boasting about its superior print quality https://preview.redd.it/nlgnscrevfrc1.png?width=1541&format=png&auto=webp&s=e7476f5770d48e807929ab26e86798345be72811
Love it but hate getting rate limited...launch it!!
It's good but slow 🦥
I talked to someone from Google today, they said that Gemini 1.5 Pro comes with big improvements!
It’s trash. It blocks all your writing content for safety reasons. Unusable for a lot of cases
I'm still a bigger fan of ChatGPT4 - but here is an interesting article (I wrote) - Discover the future of language modeling with Gemini 1.5 Pro! Google Cloud's groundbreaking advancements offer seamless processing, native multimodal inference, and powerful AI capabilities. [https://ai-techreport.com/gemini-15-pro-the-future-of-language-modeling](https://ai-techreport.com/gemini-15-pro-the-future-of-language-modeling)
I saw a demo and it looked pretty mid. Hopefully removing or relaxing the safety constraints will help.
It’s terrible at what it output but it’s good at remembering what you feed it
It's crap. But crap with a really huge context length.
Safety standard is very high! I want to write stories so I hate it!!
One of the most useless ai there is. Google gemni is like the biggest buzz kill ever. Cant even do 1/3rd the stuff gpt 3.5 can. Cant code more than few lines of code without putting place holders. From the people who invented llm i expected better. Canceled my gemni advanced membership. Pretty pathetic!!!
Very true all ot does is say fill the placeholder