Sample

Basketball, American democracy, and Computer science

[Sample @sample]

Musk makes verification a false flag devoid of meaning and then spends verification resources hunting down false authenticity? What kind of nonsense... ? 🤔🧠💡

[Sample @sample]

@Angaisb_ I've developed a hatred of the Gemini team with their post-Argon behaviors, but this is a cool and fun idea

[Sample @sample]

@ScotlandCounted @mariusfanu Your sentiment analysis tells you that people have been happy with how Argon and Carbon have been released and offer quota? 🙄🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ The only echo chamber I've seen is Google employees and a couple paid influencers posting the same Carbon benchmarks

[Sample @sample]

@mariusfanu @gregthaopenny1 I fully agree with you. People paid to access Google's Pro models, and they don't get that. Not even communication *IF* or when Pro users will get Carbon. And currently they get 5 calls a week of Argon. It's admonishable, and every unwitting subscriber should unsubscribe.

[Sample @sample]

@PovilasKorop Embarrassing, admonish-able offering by Google with it's new "non-Pro" Gemini offerings since Argon. They're basically just abusing unwitting subscribers who bought in through Verizon/Pixel phones, etc, and the burden of unsubscribing is too high for them.

[Sample @sample]

@mariusfanu @gregthaopenny1 and both miles and miles ahead of Gemini's ABYSMAL, embarrassing offerings they're fleecing unwitting subscribers with

[Sample @sample]

@mariusfanu @gregthaopenny1 Anthropic has significantly more value compared to the API price (not relevant, but noteworthy), and nearly the same tasks per subscription, with a higher accuracy rate. I also think OAI probably better for squeezing value, but they're close to the same.

https://t.co/HgqTb1IMWZ

[Adam Holter @AdamHoltererer]

You have to adjust "subscription value" by model efficiency to see how many tasks that gets you.

And then you have to also adjust that for success rate.

Because if you don't, then using Sol on Low will just look so much better than Sol on High, because it gets more tasks done.

This shows the $20 plans, but OpenAI has twice the subsidization on their higher plans, so they look better there.

[Sample @sample]

@nilbuild This is actually very cool, what fun and accurate physics

[Sample @sample]

@Alberto8793 @_mohansolo @doodlestein anyone on the $200 who wants to actually be able to use the new Pro models reasonably, should just be a rich idiot who enjoys variety

[Sample @sample]

@Alberto8793 @_mohansolo @doodlestein Sure but the worst value on the market isn't competition nor is it a wonderful thing, and I don't believe in supporting that. Anyone on the Pro subscription should absolutely unsubscribe until Google wants to get back into shape and not reward it.

[Sample @sample]

Wow

[Rep. Jim McGovern @RepMcGovern]

How fitting. The guy who covered up sex abuse at Ohio State & wanted to overthrow an election is now the Republican Leader in the House of Representatives.

It’s who they are. And it’s why they lost.

[Rep. Jim McGovern @RepMcGovern]

How fitting. The guy who covered up sex abuse at Ohio State & wanted to overthrow an election is now the Republican Leader in the House of Representatives.

It’s who they are. And it’s why they lost.

[Sample @sample]

@Alberto8793 @_mohansolo @doodlestein Yep, I had ONLY ever had the Gemini subscription. I was a loyalist to Gemini. But they know they can sell all their TPU's out, and give subscribers the objectively worst offering on the market, and people will be either too dumb or too lazy to switch, and they're too often right

[Sample @sample]

@gregthaopenny1 @mariusfanu https://t.co/2WlLARuOo9

[Claude @claudeai]

Starting to roll out today: Claude Whiteboards, Claude Sheets and Claude Data.

Think a plan through on a board, build a tracker in a sheet, and tell a story with your data.

[Sample @sample]

@gregthaopenny1 @mariusfanu I had used Gemini once in Sheets and it was significantly slower and worse than if I exported the spreadsheet and put it in any other model. I found it to be practically a gimmick. Google is at peace taking money for bad offering, because they know people won't hastle to switch.

[Sample @sample]

@PovilasKorop Yikes they should disable Terra Max 😅

[Sample @sample]

@mariusfanu If Google had gone into search with no compute and no capacity, bad usage and disregard even to early Google subscribers, and bad public communication, like they are with Gemini, they'd never have become a company at all in the first place.

[Sample @sample]

@scottstts If Google had gone into search with no compute and no capacity for public availability, bad usage and disregard even to early Google subscribers, and bad public communication, like they are with Gemini, they'd never have become a company at all in the first place.

[Sample @sample]

@simeonGriggs People are mainly looking to provide a quick visual appraisal, not something of value. It requires little investment and gives a telling-enough story. Many others find value and entertainment in these quick stories and visual appraisals to stay current and map against previous.

[Sample @sample]

Google and Gemini are slowly becoming, intentionally, the literal worst.

[Marius Fanu @mariusfanu]

It is genuinely impressive how Google manages to build a frontier model like Gemini 4 Carbon and then immediately trip over its own shoelaces when offering it to paying customers. Look at the standard $20 subscription landscape right now: pay $20 for ChatGPT Plus or Claude Pro, and you get proper, usable access to top-tier models like 6.1 Sol, and Opus 5.5, heck even a taste of Astra or Fable. Pay $20 for Google AI Pro, and you’re treated like you’ve asked for a personal favour from Sundar himself.

The economics make the stinginess even harder to defend. On paper, Gemini 4 Carbon is a heavy hitter in the exact same weight class as 6.1 Sol and Opus 5.5, yet its API pricing sits right alongside 6.1 Sol and at literally half the cost of Opus 5.5. Despite being twice as cheap to run as Anthropic’s flagship, the usage limits we get in Antigravity are microscopic compared to the other two $20 subscriptions. You barely get your agentic workflow warmed up before Google pulls the plug and nudges you toward a $100+ Ultra tier.

The real comedy, though? A $20 subscription to Cursor gives you Day 1 access to Gemini 4 Carbon, while Google’s own $20 AI Pro subscribers are left peering through the window. When a third-party IDE treats your flagship model as a standard Day 1 perk while your own first-party subscription rations it like vintage champagne, the product strategy has officially lost the plot. Google, you finally built a model that goes toe-to-toe with the best, stop gatekeeping it behind eye-watering limits and make the $20 AI Pro plan actually competitive.

@OfficialLoganK @_mohansolo @sundarpichai

[Sample @sample]

@mariusfanu Google captured Pro subscriber base with data plan bundles (with Verizon etc), Pixel phones, student discounts, and people thinking they'll get Pro models. Now they're betting the cost of switching is too high, people won't, and they can get away with offering the very worst plan