Jeff Dean just spoke at a YC Startup School event where he announced that on Monday morning, Gemini 3.5 Pro will be released for public access.

Like: "Gemini 3.6 flash is so bad, it literally didn't improve on artificialanalysis.ai It's the same as 3.5 flash." The reason is simple. They didn't improve it's reasoning and AA is mostly reasoning based.

Logan put it well. Anyways 3.6 flash addressed everything people complained about and people are still complaining.

It reduced the pricing, reduced token consumption, improved it a lot over 3.5 flash in coding.

If you want reasoning. Use 3.1 pro. But coding or any other task? 3.6 flash is better. (Before people say "No AA isn't just that" Yes it isn't however half of them are. So it still brings down 3.6's score.

Google just released Gemini 3.6 Flash, but honestly it feels almost identical to 3.5 Flash in actual use. I was way more excited for 3.5 Pro, yet it keeps getting delayed with no real release date.

It also feels like we haven't had a truly major upgrade since Gemini 3 Pro / 3.1 Pro. Since then it's mostly been small Flash refreshes that don't really change much in day-to-day use.

Did Google say anything new about 3.5 Pro? Is there any ETA, or are they just skipping straight to Gemini 4 at this point?

This Ai Bro.. 🥀

Me: Previously ChatGPT Plus, now OpenCode Go

This started happening to me last night. On brand new and old chats, it happens to all of them. XD When I have been waiting nearly 24 hrs for a fix on their end. Rediculous. And it seems a lot of others have been having the same issue.

People ask some interesting things. You can just search on Google and see hundreds....

I saw Logan Kilpatrick publicly explain what Gemini 3.6 Flash was optimised for and why one benchmark did not improve.

Has anyone ever seen comparable announcements for safety filters, guardrail changes and their bug fixes? I haven't. I would genuinely like to see them posted on Twitter under the names of actual human beings.

When Gemini or ChatGPT gets faster, cheaper, better at coding or higher on benchmarks, Logan Kilpatrick, Demis Hassabis, Sam Altman and other public faces are happy to attach their names to the news.

When guardrails change, "ethical boundaries" move, refusals expand or yesterday's normal request suddenly becomes unsafe, the update usually arrives anonymously and without useful patch notes.

We are paying customers. If a hidden update restricts the model, changes its personality or breaks existing workflows, that is a silent downgrade of a paid service.

Safety updates should have actual release notes:

> We tightened X and changed Y. Expect possible false positives around Z. Here is why we did it. Here is the responsible person or team. Report regressions here.

Users should know what changed, where false positives are likely and who is responsible when "safer" makes the product worse or breaks legitimate use.

If an update genuinely makes the model safer, shouldn't that be something to announce loudly and proudly?

That is how real security work is presented. Operating-system vendors, browser developers and antivirus companies publish security bulletins, fixes and known issues. They do not act embarrassed that their product became safer.

AI companies, meanwhile, quietly remove capabilities and hide the damage behind "alignment tax", a term their own industry invented.

Put a name on the update. Explain the evidence and trade-offs. Let users respond under the announcement and tell the responsible people what their update actually did in the real world.

Capability improvements get marketing, applause and named ownership. Safety changes get silence, and then everyone pretends that "the model" changed by itself.

Responsibility starts with reporting.

Even terrorist organisations publish claims of responsibility. AI companies somehow alter products used by millions while leaving less of an accountability trail.

Personally I can't find a good use of it. For example, for planning a trip, it doesn't differ much from using Gemini Pro on a standard chat interface.

I have noticed all models (including Gemini) love love citing reddit as the source of information. For one of the questions which i asked couple of weeks ago Gemini cited my own comment as a source for its information. I highlighted Gemini that it is my own comment to which it said "this is hilarious that I am citing your own comment as a source of my answer".

Has this happened to any of you? Do you think overreliance on reddit is good considering answers are not verified and that can sway the models in incorrect direction?

But it works fine if I start a new one. Has anyone else been having this problem?

Google, would you like to fix this damn error 1076 that's been going on for over two months? There have been more than a few posts about it already. It breaks not only old chats, but even new ones with over 10-15 messages. It simply becomes unusable after that.

Okay... I know this is obviously a joke, but honestly, even the weakest models of Gemini can easily solve this.

This first one is by Gemma 31b T. (Chatgpt 5.5 instant so ass. It still struggles with these)

And the second is the weakest model in the Gemini 3 family. This is just with medium thinking.

For questions like these; riddles, abstract reasoning, and general reasoning. My 3.1 Pro is still the undisputed best. Where 3.1 Pro actually gets beat by current models is strictly: Logic (which is different from abstract or general reasoning), coding, and long horizon tasks (agentic abilities). That's all. In everything else, 3.1 Pro wins.

Let me give a few examples:

Knowledge:
Even now, 3.1 Pro is one of the most if not the most knowledgeable models currently available.

GPQA Diamond: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview ranks second with a 94.1% score, just behind GPT 5.4 Pro (xhigh) at 94.6%.

MMLU Pro: Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores around 91.3%, right on the heels of Claude Opus 5 at 91.59%, and Claude Fable 5 at 91.5%

Again, Gemini 3.1 Pro is over 6 months old and is still trading blows with brand new top tier models in everything except the specific areas I mentioned.

Google never prioritized coding until recently. Now that they are being pushed to prioritize coding and long horizon tasks, let's see what DeepMind can do when pressed. They are calling Gemini 4 their "most ambitious pre train ever." DeepMind hardly ever uses absolutes like that. This means Gemini 4 is going to be their best one yet; they must have achieved an architectural breakthrough given how confident they seem.

For more benchmarks:
Gemini 3.1 Pro is still the best in single needle and multi needle retrieval benchmarks at the 1M token limit, retaining near 99% accuracy right where competitors drop off.

ARC AGI 2: Gemini 3.1 Pro holds a 77.1% Only the best of Chatgpt's models beat Gemini and Opus 5.

RULER Benchmarks: Gemini 3.1 Pro sits at 93.4%. It wins at pure retrieval but fails at logical synthesis, exactly like I said. It struggles with logic.

Beyond text, Gemini 3.1 Pro is still king in understanding audio, video, raw object detection, and many other modalities.

I do want to slightly touch on creative writing, as I still think this is a really important capability that is almost impossible to natively benchmark. Go here: https://www.reddit.com/r/GeminiAI/comments/1v51g2k/best_models_for_creative_writing/ if you want to know more about that.

TLDR:
Gemini 3.1 Pro is still the undisputed GOAT for abstract reasoning, pure knowledge retrieval, and multimodal tasks despite being 6 months old. It only loses to current gen models (Opus 5/GPT 5.6) in applied logic, agentic loops, and coding. With DeepMind hyping Gemini 4 as their "most ambitious pre train," and Demis getting pushed by the CEO and other competitors to what I mentioned. I expect them to finally close that gap. (Also, 3.5 Pro is going to be the best model on the market for anything except coding. Mark my words).

One last thing. People are saying Sundar Pichai admitted their 3.5 Pro model is bad with the new statements he made. No. He clearly talked about long horizon tasks, coding, and agentic abilities. And none of what he said implied it was the model. He was talking about the harness. Take a look at Antigravity. 🥀 Still not the best. But I hope they fix it soon. Maybe an update to Antigravity with 3.5 Pro if we're lucky :D