> Also, ever since the Gemini marketing video shenanigans, I don't really feel like trusting whatever Google's research says they have, if I can't test it myself.
The video was released by Google product marketing for a launch to customers, not research.
I'm still somewhat confused by this one. I understand the community has decided to be harsh on Google for that video to draw a line - fair, truth in advertising, etc. -, but at the same time, we all had an understanding of where that tech is at currently and the pace it progresses at. Did anyone watching it really assume it was realtime? Can we not differentiate between technical publications and marketing anymore? Do we have to vilify everyone in an R&D department for the sins of the product marketing wing?
We’re all harsh on it because we all had to see it being posted around by naive people as being amazing when it’s completely faked and misses half of the prompting, all of the latency.
It was completely dishonest. Considering how trash Googles actual AI products are they deserve to be dragged even more over that video.
The video was released by Google product marketing for a launch to customers, not research.
I'm still somewhat confused by this one. I understand the community has decided to be harsh on Google for that video to draw a line - fair, truth in advertising, etc. -, but at the same time, we all had an understanding of where that tech is at currently and the pace it progresses at. Did anyone watching it really assume it was realtime? Can we not differentiate between technical publications and marketing anymore? Do we have to vilify everyone in an R&D department for the sins of the product marketing wing?