Comment on Google Gemini struggles to write code, calls itself “a disgrace to my species”
simplejack@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Honestly, Gemini is probably the worst out of the big 3 Silicon Valley models. GPT and Claude are much better with code, reasoning, writing clear and succinct copy, etc.
I always hear people saying Gemini is the best novel and every time I try it it’s… not useful.
Even as code autocomplete I rarely accept any suggestions. Google has a number of features in Google cloud where Gemini can auto generate things and those are also pretty terrible.
I don’t know anyone in the Valley who considers Gemini to be the best for code. Anthropic has been leading the pack over the year, and as a results, a lot of the most popular development and prototyping tools have been hitching their car to Claude models.
I imagine there are some things the model excels at, but for copy writing, code, image gen, and data vis, Google is not my first choice.
Google is the “it’s free with G suite” choice.
There’s no frontier where I choose Gemini except when it’s the only option, or I need to be price sensitive through the API
Interesting thing is that GPT 5 looks pretty price competitive with . It looks like they’re probably running at a loss to try to capture market share.
cabillaud@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Could an AI use another AI if it found it better for a given task?
panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
Yes, and this is pretty common with tools like Aider — one LLM plays the architect, another writes the code.
Claude code now has sub agents which work the same way, but only use Claude models.
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 days ago
The overall interface can, which leads to fun results.
Prompt for image generation then you have one model doing the text and a different model for image generation. The text pretends is generating an image but has no idea what that would be like and you can make the text and image interaction make no sense, or it will do it all on its own. Have it generate and image and then lie to it about the image it generated and watch it just completely show it has no idea what picture was ever shown, but all the while pretending it does without ever explaining that it’s actually delegating the image. It just lies and says “I” am correcting that for you. Basically talking like an executive at a company, which helps explain why so many executives are true believers.
A common thing is for the ensemble to recognize mathy stuff and feed it to a math engine, perhaps after LLM techniques to normalize the math.