• dantheclammanOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    97 months ago

    yes, I find Gemini actually not bad when it comes to my specific use case of showing generic examples for R programming, so I can figure out the syntax for my actual code. I don’t try to have it generate actual code for me because my topic of marine biogeochemistry is far too specific for it to have any idea how to work with it. Unlike ChatGPT, which often makes up nonsense functions or hallucinates whole packages, Gemini seems to do ok. I also found it pretty good for generating images of natural subjects. It did the best job of generating a pic of a giant clam of any image generator I’ve tried. I would never trust factual information from Gemini. So like Google+, it’s a pretty good product that in no way should be shunted into search results, Google Docs and other places where its output is not relevant, yet that is exactly the trap Google is falling into again.

    • Jo Miran
      link
      fedilink
      English
      57 months ago

      …yet that is exactly the trap Google is falling into again.

      Every time. It’d be funny if it didn’t mean people constantly being punished and losing their jobs for errors made at the executive level.

    • @0xD@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -17 months ago

      With Gemini you can let it show you search results for (some) of its statements. It’s useful for cross-checking: I was, for example, researching plastics recycling and there was a claim that seemed untrue and corporate. The automagic search/source function for that statement led me to a blog post of some consortium/lobbying group of manufacturers. After telling that to Gemini it apologized and compiled a list of different view points for that specific statement.

      I was pretty impressed with that, and I find it very useful for researching topics I know basically nothing about. Of course it’s not the sole source of truth.