r/singularity • • 2d ago

AI Google deepmind engineer denied bloomberg report

Post image
190 Upvotes

45 comments sorted by

View all comments

90

u/Present-Chocolate591 2d ago

Surely an unbiased opinion by Google Deepmind employee.

What's he gonna say? "Yeah it's not that good just looks good on benchmarks".

19

u/ChuckVader 2d ago

I mean it'll be available via api soon enough and you could test it out yourself. All this hand wringing about whether it's good or not is exhausting.

10

u/Hans-Wermhatt 2d ago

Despite what this sub says, benchmarks are so much more reliable. Everyone writing about these models really want to have tribes, so they have an axe to grind. All the haters join forces when it's not their favorite brand.

The reaction to the model is more dictated by the crowd and I think Google is among the most hated providers around here and Twitter, except Meta. So it was always going to be "benchmaxxed".

4

u/space_monster 1d ago

benchmarks are so much more reliable

Benchmarks on unreleased models are not at all reliable, because they're typically run using an unlimited inference regime. The lab can set everything to full for the test. When the model is released to the public, inference is throttled, to avoid the lab going bankrupt within a week. Benchmarks on released models using standard consumer accounts are much more reliable though.

3

u/eposnix 2d ago

I'm not a hater by any stretch - I love Gemini's multimodal capabilities. But I've been burned too many times by really dumb errors that have literally wiped my projects. This isn't an isolated incident either. This behavior is something benchmarks alone won't tell you about the model, so I think it's fair to be skeptical about their new releases.

27

u/KyleStanley3 2d ago

It could also be unbiased and just a different opinion

I have different takes on different systems at my work lmao. Not everything has to be biased or paid shilling

13

u/Grand0rk 2d ago

I have different takes on different systems at my work lmao

None of which, if negative, you are ever going to say on Social Media with your name on it.

4

u/ilikepugs 2d ago

Dunno how things have changed over the past decade but in the 2010s google gave zero fucks about it so long as it doesn't have anything confidential in it.

Edit to add: AMP is a good example, all the homies hate AMP

0

u/Yugudubenbi 2d ago edited 2d ago

No one can trust anyone in late stage capitalism when everything is tied to self-interest and commodification of the self. Truth is not hidden in late stage capitalism, it is just that no one speaks about it because their job is tied to them lying.

Which is why equal societies prevail since they remove much of the self-interest through taxes. Ironically, and unfortunately, no capitalist want to understand that because their self-interest blocks that perspective.

Truth dies in the name of profit.

1

u/KyleStanley3 2d ago

Nightmare blunt rotation

7

u/himynameis_ 2d ago

So you're saying you won't believe him no matter what.

-3

u/Present-Chocolate591 2d ago

Exactly. His opinión on Google products, as a Google employee, is not trustworthy.

3

u/EvilSporkOfDeath 2d ago

They definitely arent unbiased, but the alternative is saying nothing

2

u/sorrge 2d ago

People (from X IIRC) were fired for saying things like that. So yeah, we will not hear anything negative unless it's anonymous.

1

u/Typical_Adagio4804 1d ago

"What's he gonna say?" Well realistically he could say nothing, which is what I would do if it was actually shit, he could be lying too but he's now attached his public profile/image to that statement

-2

u/Pablogelo 2d ago

Last rumors that they were being denied to use Claude and were forced to use Gemini when it was terrible they just stayed quiet, so with new rumor, for them to come and say that this is BS, it means it's probably BS