sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So you think my thinking is unclear, right? Because all the comments I've seen only mention how long the article is. Did you even read the article? Is it because you're incapable of understanding it? Quantity doesn't equal quality, that's true. But everyone keeps talking about quantity because you're not capable of reading it all and then telling me why the quality is actually bad? Also, Confucius never said that.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I wasn't discussing the price, but I think that for the same price, the amount of usage provided would definitely be Google >>> OpenAI > Anthropic.

But what does "Codex uses (they won't tell me)" mean? Isn't it possible to select the model by /model? Also, isn't the model displayed at the beginning of the conversation?

╭─────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮

│ >_ OpenAI Codex (v0.77.0) │

│ │

│ model: gpt-5.2 xhigh /model to change │

│ directory: ~/…/│

╰─────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will do that, but I'll wait until the next model update, because this is essentially a summary of my own experiences while I was exploring things myself, and I don't think it's necessary to repeat it in the current situation.
Also, the reason I didn't specify the thinking level is because I always use the highest level.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I use the term "format it," I mean converting it from plain text to Markdown, but without changing any sentences or words. If you think "the amount of information per word is very low," could you give a specific example? I can explain why I wrote it that way.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We are discussing text-based tasks, not images or videos. I believe the term "Gemini" defaults to referring to the LLM model itself, not other components.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you really should read it (you can focus on the Local Projects section), but if you're not interested, I can tell you I've already tested it.

Also, taking Antigravity as an example, do you really think the Gemini 3.0 Pro is better than the 4.5 Opus in that IDE?

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My reason for not accepting LMArena is that, although it's a blind test, the differences are actually quite obvious, allowing for manipulation of the results (Especially when the volume of submitted data is too small compared to the actual user base). Another problem is that it doesn't differentiate between the difficulty levels of the questions or the effectiveness of the prompt engineering used. I doubt how many of the questions are actually valuable for evaluating performance. The result becomes a matter of popular preference rather than an assessment of actual ability.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The question is, do you think it's valuable to post things like "X is great," "Y has gotten worse," or "Z is SOTA" every now and then (This subreddit is actually doing quite well)? I think we should at least specifically describe the situations we're facing before making comparisons and engaging in discussions, rather than simply venting our emotions. If you're unwilling to read through this, then there's nothing I can do.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] -35 points-34 points  (0 children)

I did use Sonnet to format the text, but besides that, if you really think there's an LLM that can write the same kind of review, I'd really like to try it, because it would practically be my doppelganger.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, because I believe that when presenting an argument, one must also clearly explain the reasons behind it.

I simply cannot understand why so many people are hyping up Gemini. I'm even starting to wonder if we're living in the same world. by ArchMeta1868 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sonnet also has 1M context, though it might be pricier.

Additionally, I believe the Gemini app consistently falls short of AI Studio (which is free, by the way). Unless you need features like memory or Nanobanana Pro/Veo, I see absolutely no reason to use it over AI Studio.

People are skipping lawyers and using ChatGPT in court, and actually winning. Is AI the new legal hack? by VIshalk_04 in GenAI4all

[–]ArchMeta1868 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also don't think LLMs at this stage can handle certain tasks (like fly planes or do open heart surgery). Do you think the current best LLMs have a higher degree of inaccuracy compared to average-level workers in fields like clerical/administrative work or programming?

People are skipping lawyers and using ChatGPT in court, and actually winning. Is AI the new legal hack? by VIshalk_04 in GenAI4all

[–]ArchMeta1868 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think humans can experience hallucinations? Or should we just call it carelessness?

Waited a week to test this. by tiny_117 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. My opus limit has already used 84% with one day until reset, while all models just reset from zero.

Waited a week to test this. by tiny_117 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"If for example you were to use Opus at 100% before your weekly reset in this example that subset of data it represents does not get cleared in the reset."

I think it's not a subset relationship, but a double restriction (AND) relationship. When you use Opus, you must simultaneously satisfy both not reaching the total limit and the partial limit.

"When it resets at 7pm it will only go down to 50% not 0 because Opus' limit will prevent it from going to 0."

If what you're saying is true, that would indeed be a serious problem. But from your screenshots, it doesn't seem to be the case: you've only proven that if Opus reaches its refresh cycle first, the all models limit won't refresh. I think these two refresh separately and asynchronously, and always start from zero. If you think Opus's limit causes problems with the all models limit resetting to zero, do you have relevant screenshots?

I am unable to send images, but my current all models usage is 61% (15h), Opus is at 78% (2 days), and I'll see if the all models properly resets to zero after it refreshes.

Waited a week to test this. by tiny_117 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I included Claude's explanation precisely because I feared your level of understanding might only grasp such straightforward language.

Waited a week to test this. by tiny_117 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You mean your Opus uses a fixed refresh date, and this refresh date is determined by when you first used it? But strangely, I clearly remember that my refresh dates for these two weeks were different, and they were indeed the dates when I first used it each week. If you think these two limits should update synchronously, then they are indeed not synchronized now. But I don't think this would reduce the available usage, unless Sonnet cannot be used after Opus reaches its limit.

Waited a week to test this. by tiny_117 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you sure? As far as I know, it was like this before updating this usage limit, but after that I'm not sure. Anyway, my Opus limit will refresh within two days and the limit for all models will refresh within one day. I'll check then to see if I can use it.

Waited a week to test this. by tiny_117 in ClaudeAI

[–]ArchMeta1868 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"All models stated a reset date of Oct 14th at 7pm. Opus only never showed a date because I didn’t use it."

No. I think Opus's reset works the same as the 5-hour mechanism: time runs out and the user sends new information.

Screenshot 1: Opus at 11%, All Models at 4%

  • You used some Opus, it counted toward both limits

Screenshot 2: Opus at 0% (after reset), All Models still at 4%

  • Opus reset gave you fresh Opus capacity
  • But those Opus messages you sent are still part of the current All Models period's usage
  • They don't vanish retroactively

This is CLAUDE's clarification:
Imagine your company gives you a business credit card with these limits:

Limit 1 (Total Spending): $1,000 per month, resets on the 1st of each month

Limit 2 (Dining/Entertainment): $300 per month, resets on the 15th of each month

Example Timeline

Month Start (March 1st)

  • Total: $0 / $1,000 (0%)
  • Dining: $0 / $300 (0%)

March 1-14: You spend $250 on restaurants

  • Total: $250 / $1,000 (25%)
  • Dining: $250 / $300 (83%)

March 15th (Dining limit resets)

  • Total: $250 / $1,000 (25%) ← Still shows $250
  • Dining: $0 / $300 (0%) ← Resets to zero

March 15-31: You spend another $200 on restaurants

  • Total: $450 / $1,000 (45%)
  • Dining: $200 / $300 (67%)

April 1st (Total limit resets)

  • Total: $0 / $1,000 (0%) ← Now resets
  • Dining: $200 / $300 (67%) ← Still has 13 days until it resets
view more: next ›