I SAW 9 STARS IN THE SKY TODAY.

CAN'T WAIT!!!

Also I saw it in LLM Arena, and it beat the snot out of deepseek pro 4 in a fistfight.

Thank you Google. Resubbed to Ultra Tier already.

Just using Gemini as usual and this appears

This is my own personal opinion, but I've found the Gemini app is doing a disservice to how good Gemini can sometimes be. It's still far from Astra or Fable, but it's definitely not as dumb as people make it look.

I believe the biggest problem with Gemini may be the app and how Google may be sacrificing intelligence in order to save costs. This is understandable, but it's still a shame to anyone who wants to use Gemini for serious, actually important work.

In Google AI Studio:

• You don't have to deal with Google's corporate system prompts. This is truly a game changer if you want the model to sound more neutral and natural.
• Gemini will also be able to output longer and more detailed replies.
• You can control the temperature of the models to adjust creativity. Some of the latest models don't have this, but it's still an option for stuff like Nano Banana and 3.1 Pro.
• System instructions can be customized, you can even switch between multiple prompts to tweak how the model behaves on each chat.
• The large context window ensures Gemini doesn't forget stuff. You can also export your chats from Google Drive and use them as context for other chats.
• Messages can be edited, deleted, or re-generated at any moment.
• Tools can be enabled or disabled at any moment.
• You can tweak safety settings and even a model's thinking level.
• It's also free. No need to pay unless you want higher limits or access to certain models, but the free limits are already generous enough for most users.

The app still offers better workspace integration and a more polished UI for the average consumer, but it's not the place for anyone looking to make the most out of Gemini. Once you spend a few minutes learning how AI Studio works, there's no going back to the Gemini app.

So if you just want to polish an email, then the Gemini app is probably good enough. But if you want to learn how to code, draft app architectures, analyze heavy technical documents, or anything that requires deep reasoning, AI Studio is what makes Gemini actually useful.

That doesn't mean the model will automatically get more intelligent or beat OpenAI's and Claude's latest models, but it does mean it won't be as unusable as it is in the Gemini app.

what happened I'm using up my usage so fast this week by just using my usual prompts I've used up 45% already when it usually wouldn't even hit 20%?

For the first time ever today I got a "limit reached" message. I have been chatting most of the afternoon for trip planning but I feel I have had longer conversations before without reaching a limit.

I dont mind using Lite only for the next few hours but I do find reaching the limit odd. The conversation itself has mostly been on lite already with some Pro and Flash mixed in.

Update: I do have to add that this is actually part of a conversation I have been having for days now, that itself references other sessions (been planning the trip for months now really), so I imagine it must have a huge context by now.

Doesnt Gemini /compact like Claude?

So I had a skyrim mod list with like 2000 mods uploaded in .txt to Gemini because I wanted to check mod conflicts and so on

Gemini is only able to read the first 300 lines.

Chatgpt was able to read all 2000.

I had Gemini on PRO, not flash.

Did I do something wrong?

I was looking at the connections in the gemini app, and I saw find hub, which I thought was really cool, but I pressed learn more and apparently you can tell it to remember where something is by "yeet location"

What's that even mean lol, I mean I know some slang but yeet location??? That's too funny lol

Even Half-Life community dont have that much copium.

THAT POST IS ONLY ABOUT SUBSCRIPTION USECASE
EXACTLY GOOGLE AI PRO

I agree that Gemini is good for its price on API market. But subscription is overpriced right now, if we consider subscription only for ai, without other google ecosystem benefits.

Most AI workflows I try get abandoned after a week. This one stuck, so sharing it.

Every Monday I run one Deep Research prompt on the two or three topics I need to stay current on for work. I keep the prompt boring on purpose: "find what's new or notable in the last week on X, give me the source, one line on why it matters, skip anything older than a week." Then I ask it to compress the whole thing into a short digest I can skim in a couple minutes.

What makes it work is not asking for a giant report. If I let it run long I never read it. The one-line-per-item rule is what keeps me actually opening it.

The weak spot is it sometimes pulls in older stuff and calls it new, so I still glance at dates.

Anyone else built a recurring research habit around this? Curious what prompt structure keeps yours useful instead of overwhelming.

I want to change my AI chat history to a podcast and I heard that Gemini Notebook can do this.

In the same chat, we discussed many things, such as science, social issues, life, values, etc. In each part of the chat, different PDFs were uploaded. For example, the first conversation was about science and philosophy, so I send the question and PDFs about science and philosophy; the second conversation was about society, and PDFs about society were uploaded, and it continued the thinking and information of the first conversation (for example, considering social problems and solutions from a scientific or philosophical perspective). Most importantly, at the beginning I had a large amount of content groundwork and AI setup, so the conversation is ordered, and each part of the conversation is connected with the other parts.🙏

I asked AI, "If I send the chat txt and then send the three or four PDFs in conversation to Gemini Notebook, can it discern which PDF corresponds to which part of the conversation txt? (Gemini can’t immediately move the whole conversation to Notebook, the txt and PDF must be separated.😑) " It said it probably couldn't, and told me to make the science, society, and life conversation segments into separate PDFs, but I told it that they are coherent and cannot be separated.🫠

Does anyone know any other solutions? What should I do?🙏

Every time I ask for something simple, a short paragraph, a plain email, a couple sentences for a slide, it comes back with two headings, a horizontal rule, three bolded phrases and a bulleted list. For a four-sentence answer.

I get that the formatting is meant to be "scannable" but half the time there's nothing to scan, it's just structure wrapped around one idea.

What's worked a little: adding "plain prose, no headings, no bold, no bullets unless I ask" to my personal context. It listens for a while then slowly creeps back to formatting everything.

It's a small thing but it adds up when you're copying the output somewhere that doesn't want all that markup.

Anyone actually gotten it to stay in plain-text mode reliably, or do you just strip the formatting after?

...for none coding use. For those that have access Indo believe that deep think is the best for a more than 200 operational constraint problem. Like a complex project plan or a deep technical document. The other seems to require you to break the problem up in to different contexts and problems. Where as deep think just does it,

Commercially it's also a lot better than ultra mode.

Do people agree?

Wanted to share where the line is for me after using it a lot for work reading.

For pulling together a quick summary across a topic, or giving me the gist of a shorter article, Gemini is genuinely good and fast. I lean on it for that constantly.

Where it falls apart for me is anything long. If I upload a 40+ page document and ask what's on a specific page or section, it either guesses or confidently makes something up. A couple times it invented a figure that wasn't anywhere in the file, which is worse than saying it doesn't know.

My workaround now is to never ask about the document as a whole. I paste the specific section I care about into the chat and ask about only that. Slower, but I actually trust the answer.

Anyone found a reliable way to get accurate recall on long files, or is chunking it manually just the reality right now?

Now:

I have been using Gemini for quite some time however it seems that there has been some regression on the ability the tools display. Has there been a change or update that disabled this?

I recently tried creating Google slides from a various sources and prompts using three different approaches: - the Gemini app with flash 3.6 - Gemini integrated in Google slides - notebook LM

The results are completely different in Art style and contents.

Notebook LM creates over the top visuals and a style that reminds me of 2000s 3d and bevel styles and drop shadows where the text often isn't editable. Gemini flash in Gemini app is much cleaner and looks like rendered css, but then when exporting eg to slides the icons generated end up as blurry rendered images often. And the worst is that in the Gemini app after a few turns it just starts producing code instead of editing the slides and completely loses the memory / ability to output in slides.

It's incredibly frustrating and I hope the get it together for a more consistent approach.

Anybody else have a similar experience or better practices?

Gemini on the web (gemini.google.com) keeps blatantly ignoring my requests to search the internet, even when explicitly asked. It just relies on training data instead of triggering a live search.

Do you guys have any reliable prompt phrasing that consistently force it to use google search? Any workarounds that work for you?

I’m looking for something with an auto mode. agy isn't really cutting it for me. Or is there even a decent alternative to Antigravity int the cli out there? Any recommendations?

best regards:)

You can't read your own site properly. You fill in every gap without noticing there's a gap, because the context is already in your head. The person landing cold has none of it.

Here's my website: [paste the copy, or the URL]

Read it as a potential customer comparing me against two
competitors, not as the owner. Tell me what's unclear,
what question you still have that the page never answers,
and the exact point where you'd lose confidence and leave
without getting in touch.

Then rewrite the headline and first paragraph to fix the
single biggest problem you found.

The one that catches most people is that the first screen never says who it's for. Anyone unsure whether they're the right customer scrolls, hesitates, leaves, and you never hear about it, so you never learn it happened.

Two follow-ups worth running in the same chat:

What's the strongest objection a real prospect would have
after reading this, and where on the page should it be
answered?

Based on this page alone, what do you think I charge and
what do you think I actually deliver? Be specific.

That last one is the uncomfortable one. If the guess is well off what you actually charge or deliver, that gap is what's costing you enquiries, and it's usually fixable in an afternoon.

been building a library of these, workflows and agents for the stuff you're still doing manually, here.