Thread

Gemini 4 Argon

1699 points · 1187 comments · bradleyg223

babelfish · 1790798806 · focus · HN ↗
> We’ll continue to gather feedback from early testers as we iterate on guardrails before making Argon available to developers, enterprises, and consumers as soon as possible.
Gemini not beating the "can't release a model" allegations
1. Androider · 1790799888 · focus · HN ↗
  My Gemini app (updated today) and <a href="https://gemini.google.com/" rel="nofollow">https://gemini.google.com/ has _3.6_ as the latest selectable model, as a paying Pro user in the US. How is that even possible? Gemini 3.7 was released in August, 3.8 early September. What is going on over there?
  1. rahimnathwani · 1790806287 · focus · HN ↗
    In my consumer gmail account with Pro, I see:
    3.5 Flash-Lite 3.8 Flash 3.1 Pro
    In both a paid Google Workspace account (without the AI addon) and a free 'GSuite' account, I see:
    3.6 Flash 3.6 Thinking 3.1 Pro
    r1ch · 1790809989 · focus · HN ↗
    We're on Enterprise Standard, our renewal was up like 50% because "Gemini is included now think of all the added value" yet they won't even give us the latest models. I tried hard to champion Gemini internally once every user had it included, yet we ended up spending extra on Claude because Gemini has stagnated. Even the included usage for the Gemini CLI was taken away and now requires an extra subscription. I wonder if we we'll even see Gemini 4 before 2028. It's ridiculous.
    giancarlostoro · 1790811467 · focus · HN ↗
    Every time I hear stuff like this, I think of that Office Space thing... you don't want the Engineers talking directly to the customers.. well it sounds like the Engineers are also handling all releases and business decisions willy nilly.
    RugnirViking · 1790844315 · focus · HN ↗
    you think engineers are responsible? why?
    giancarlostoro · 1790860196 · focus · HN ↗
    Because I have worked with responsible engineers, but it seems like Google is overrun by them there's a lot of really bad business stuff going on. It's like when I think of AWS, nothing on there is named for business people, its all really bad names that IT / Devs come up with.
    wavemode · 1790864434 · focus · HN ↗
    AWS as a whole is sold to businesspeople, sure, but the individual AWS products are definitely being sold to engineers. S3 and EC2 don't need to have layperson-friendly names, since laypeople don't understand what they are or why one would or wouldn't use them - those are CTO/tech lead decisions.
    giancarlostoro · 1790866492 · focus · HN ↗
    I still have simpler conversations when talking about Azure services and naming them, they have reasonable names. I never did anything with GCP so I cannot compare, but I assume their naming scheme is also reasonable. It feels to me like AWS was basically they decided to offer some of their internal things externally, nobody renamed anything, and then they just ran with it.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.