Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Google literally created a high quality 3D animation solely to push RCS propaganda onto users They do not even produce this level of creative animation for their own Google Pixel phone keynotes They did it right in front of our fucking eyes, no one pushed back, and everyone sided... show more

Pixel Gamer 4k

12,752 subscribers

39,379 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Apple Maps 3d is insanely impressive now (see video below) Google on the other hand decided to build an insanely clunky solution to display 3d maps to avoid using mobile GPUs: A Google server streams (!) a live video of its 3d rendered map to you, the result is a disastrous: a super laggy and clunky 3d view full of video compression artefacts with a response time of 2-3 seconds for every movement And I know WHY they built that, someone felt it was not inclusive to only have 3d maps that are high performing on iOS because Apple's GPUs are insanely fast and can deal with it (as you can see below in Apple Maps) but they wanted to support inferior phones, I get it But then they also decided to worsen the experience for iOS users who could easily run 3d natively on its GPU It's just an insane product decision, there's no way to cut it: they could have super smooth 3d like Apple Maps but neutered it with a clunky live stream Even more insane because Google does have native 3d on iOS in a completely different app that nobody uses: Google Earth Is 3d important? Not rly for nav no but it shows again something about Google's engineering decisions, like the redesign of the Google OAuth Login screen that made zero sense Nobody is speaking up against bad ideas in Google meetings, everyone's too scared of HR maybe, it's the opposite of a meritocracy and it's just super visible from using Google products right now

Apple Maps 3d is insanely impressive now (see video below) Google on the other hand decided to build an insanely clunky solution to display 3d maps to avoid using mobile GPUs: A Google server streams (!) a live video of its 3d rendered map to you, the result is a disastrous: a super laggy and clunky 3d view full of video compression artefacts with a response time of 2-3 seconds for every movement And I know WHY they built that, someone felt it was not inclusive to only have 3d maps that are high performing on iOS because Apple's GPUs are insanely fast and can deal with it (as you can see below in Apple Maps) but they wanted to support inferior phones, I get it But then they also decided to worsen the experience for iOS users who could easily run 3d natively on its GPU It's just an insane product decision, there's no way to cut it: they could have super smooth 3d like Apple Maps but neutered it with a clunky live stream Even more insane because Google does have native 3d on iOS in a completely different app that nobody uses: Google Earth Is 3d important? Not rly for nav no but it shows again something about Google's engineering decisions, like the redesign of the Google OAuth Login screen that made zero sense Nobody is speaking up against bad ideas in Google meetings, everyone's too scared of HR maybe, it's the opposite of a meritocracy and it's just super visible from using Google products right now

@levelsio

1,488,981 views • 2 years ago

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says that even though Apple partnered with Google Gemini for Siri, they actually run their business on Anthropic. "Apple runs on Anthropic at this point. Anthropic is powering a lot of the stuff Apple's doing internally in terms of product development and a lot of their internal tools." "They have custom versions of Claude running on their own servers internally, too. This Google deal just came together a few months ago. They were not going to use Google. Apple actually was going to rebuild Siri around Claude. But Anthropic was holding them over a barrel. They wanted a ton of money from them, several billion dollars a year, and at a price that doubled on an annual basis for the next three years."

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says that even though Apple partnered with Google Gemini for Siri, they actually run their business on Anthropic. "Apple runs on Anthropic at this point. Anthropic is powering a lot of the stuff Apple's doing internally in terms of product development and a lot of their internal tools." "They have custom versions of Claude running on their own servers internally, too. This Google deal just came together a few months ago. They were not going to use Google. Apple actually was going to rebuild Siri around Claude. But Anthropic was holding them over a barrel. They wanted a ton of money from them, several billion dollars a year, and at a price that doubled on an annual basis for the next three years."

TBPN

944,799 views • 7 months ago

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says that even though Apple partnered with Google Gemini for Siri, they actually run their business on Anthropic. "Apple runs on Anthropic at this point. Anthropic is powering a lot of the stuff Apple's doing internally in terms of product development and a lot of their internal tools." "They have custom versions of Claude running on their own servers internally, too. This Google deal just came together a few months ago. They were not going to use Google. Apple actually was going to rebuild Siri around Claude. But Anthropic was holding them over a barrel. They wanted a ton of money from them, several billion dollars a year, and at a price that doubled on an annual basis for the next three years." From his January appearance on the show.

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says that even though Apple partnered with Google Gemini for Siri, they actually run their business on Anthropic. "Apple runs on Anthropic at this point. Anthropic is powering a lot of the stuff Apple's doing internally in terms of product development and a lot of their internal tools." "They have custom versions of Claude running on their own servers internally, too. This Google deal just came together a few months ago. They were not going to use Google. Apple actually was going to rebuild Siri around Claude. But Anthropic was holding them over a barrel. They wanted a ton of money from them, several billion dollars a year, and at a price that doubled on an annual basis for the next three years." From his January appearance on the show.

TBPN

93,944 views • 5 months ago

Google wrote the paper that made ChatGPT possible. Then decided not to build ChatGPT. Sergey Brin just explained why on stage at Stanford and the reason is more embarrassing than anyone expected. In 2017, Google published the transformer paper. The architecture that powers every major AI model today. It came from their own researchers. Their own labs. Their own compute. Then they sat on it. Sergey was blunt about why. They underinvested in scaling the compute. They did not take it seriously enough. And when they finally had something worth shipping, they got scared. Chatbots say dumb things. Google had a reputation to protect. So they protected it instead of shipping. OpenAI was not scared. Ilya Sutskever, trained at Google, left and went there. Other Google researchers followed. They took the transformer architecture, scaled it, shipped it anyway, and captured the entire generative AI wave while Google watched. Sergey called it a mistake at Stanford in front of hundreds of students. The company that invented the technology did not build the product. The company that built the product did not invent the technology. That is the most expensive case of corporate hesitation in the history of the industry. --- Watch the full interview YT. Search: "Big ideas begin here: Sergey Brin at Stanford"

Google wrote the paper that made ChatGPT possible. Then decided not to build ChatGPT. Sergey Brin just explained why on stage at Stanford and the reason is more embarrassing than anyone expected. In 2017, Google published the transformer paper. The architecture that powers every major AI model today. It came from their own researchers. Their own labs. Their own compute. Then they sat on it. Sergey was blunt about why. They underinvested in scaling the compute. They did not take it seriously enough. And when they finally had something worth shipping, they got scared. Chatbots say dumb things. Google had a reputation to protect. So they protected it instead of shipping. OpenAI was not scared. Ilya Sutskever, trained at Google, left and went there. Other Google researchers followed. They took the transformer architecture, scaled it, shipped it anyway, and captured the entire generative AI wave while Google watched. Sergey called it a mistake at Stanford in front of hundreds of students. The company that invented the technology did not build the product. The company that built the product did not invent the technology. That is the most expensive case of corporate hesitation in the history of the industry. --- Watch the full interview YT. Search: "Big ideas begin here: Sergey Brin at Stanford"

Ihtesham Ali

244,666 views • 2 months ago

Everyone knows this person is male. Everyone. Literally, everyone. Gender ideology wants to force everyone to deny what they see with their own eyes & then punish them for those natural human instincts, making it one of the most dangerous ideologies society has ever created.

Everyone knows this person is male. Everyone. Literally, everyone. Gender ideology wants to force everyone to deny what they see with their own eyes & then punish them for those natural human instincts, making it one of the most dangerous ideologies society has ever created.

Sall Grover

272,387 views • 2 years ago

Google is making $62 billion a quarter destroying the websites it NEEDS to survive. This is literally a death spiral that ends with Google killing itself. Let me explain what's going on... Google added AI summaries to the top of every search result in 2024. When you Google something now, the answer sits right there on Google's page. You never have to click anywhere. Google took the information from someone else's website, summarized it, and kept you inside Google's ecosystem. The result: 60% of all Google searches now end without a single click to any website. Small publishers lost 60% of their traffic in one year. Medium publishers lost 47%. Even the biggest names in media, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Business Insider, all saw traffic fall between 22% and 55%. The Axios CEO called it "a referral extinction event for the ad-supported web." Google's response to all of this was to tell publishers they can "opt out" of having their content summarized. But opting out also REMOVES your description from normal search results. So the choice Google gives you is let us steal your content for free, or become invisible on the internet. That's extortion. The Washington Post laid off another round of journalists this year because of it. Stereogum, one of the most respected music publications on the internet, had to BEG readers for donations. Business Insider cut 21% of its staff. Dozens of smaller publishers have shut down entirely. The people who actually CREATE the information Google summarizes are going bankrupt while Google posts record revenue. But here's where this gets interesting and where everyone stops thinking: Google's AI summaries are only as good as the content they summarize. If the publishers who write the original articles, run the original investigations, and create the original data go out of business, there is nothing left for Google to summarize. The AI starts recycling old information, the answers get stale, the quality drops, and users start noticing that Google's summaries are increasingly wrong, outdated, or useless. Google is essentially strip-mining the internet for short-term revenue. They are extracting all the value from content creators without paying for it, driving those creators out of business, and then wondering why the quality of their own product is declining. This is exactly what Napster did to the music industry in the early 2000s: Made content free, creators went broke, and quality collapsed. It took a decade to rebuild. Google is doing the same thing to the entire internet at 100x the scale. Rolling Stone, Variety, Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, and Billboard are now suing Google for antitrust violations. Chegg, the education platform, lost 49% of its traffic and is suing too. The UK's competition authority just ordered Google to let publishers opt out without being punished. The DOJ already ruled Google is an illegal monopoly. And Google's defense in court is genuinely unbelievable. They argue that publishers CHOOSE to let Google index their content and can leave anytime they want. That's like saying you choose to pay protection money to the mob because technically you could close your business and move to another city. Google controls 90% of search. Leaving Google means leaving the internet. Meanwhile Google is investing billions in custom AI chips to make these summaries cheaper at scale. Every quarter the problem gets worse. The internet as we've known it for 25 years ran on a simple deal: Publishers make content. Google sends traffic. Advertisers pay for the traffic. Everyone wins. But Google just BROKE that deal and kept all the money.

Google is making $62 billion a quarter destroying the websites it NEEDS to survive. This is literally a death spiral that ends with Google killing itself. Let me explain what's going on... Google added AI summaries to the top of every search result in 2024. When you Google something now, the answer sits right there on Google's page. You never have to click anywhere. Google took the information from someone else's website, summarized it, and kept you inside Google's ecosystem. The result: 60% of all Google searches now end without a single click to any website. Small publishers lost 60% of their traffic in one year. Medium publishers lost 47%. Even the biggest names in media, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Business Insider, all saw traffic fall between 22% and 55%. The Axios CEO called it "a referral extinction event for the ad-supported web." Google's response to all of this was to tell publishers they can "opt out" of having their content summarized. But opting out also REMOVES your description from normal search results. So the choice Google gives you is let us steal your content for free, or become invisible on the internet. That's extortion. The Washington Post laid off another round of journalists this year because of it. Stereogum, one of the most respected music publications on the internet, had to BEG readers for donations. Business Insider cut 21% of its staff. Dozens of smaller publishers have shut down entirely. The people who actually CREATE the information Google summarizes are going bankrupt while Google posts record revenue. But here's where this gets interesting and where everyone stops thinking: Google's AI summaries are only as good as the content they summarize. If the publishers who write the original articles, run the original investigations, and create the original data go out of business, there is nothing left for Google to summarize. The AI starts recycling old information, the answers get stale, the quality drops, and users start noticing that Google's summaries are increasingly wrong, outdated, or useless. Google is essentially strip-mining the internet for short-term revenue. They are extracting all the value from content creators without paying for it, driving those creators out of business, and then wondering why the quality of their own product is declining. This is exactly what Napster did to the music industry in the early 2000s: Made content free, creators went broke, and quality collapsed. It took a decade to rebuild. Google is doing the same thing to the entire internet at 100x the scale. Rolling Stone, Variety, Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, and Billboard are now suing Google for antitrust violations. Chegg, the education platform, lost 49% of its traffic and is suing too. The UK's competition authority just ordered Google to let publishers opt out without being punished. The DOJ already ruled Google is an illegal monopoly. And Google's defense in court is genuinely unbelievable. They argue that publishers CHOOSE to let Google index their content and can leave anytime they want. That's like saying you choose to pay protection money to the mob because technically you could close your business and move to another city. Google controls 90% of search. Leaving Google means leaving the internet. Meanwhile Google is investing billions in custom AI chips to make these summaries cheaper at scale. Every quarter the problem gets worse. The internet as we've known it for 25 years ran on a simple deal: Publishers make content. Google sends traffic. Advertisers pay for the traffic. Everyone wins. But Google just BROKE that deal and kept all the money.

Ricardo

251,003 views • 3 months ago

> 15 years old > opens Google Maps > finds a business with no website > copies their reviews > pastes into Claude > 2 minutes later - full website ready > calls the owner > sells it for $1,300 > did it in 6 minutes total > Google Maps is open on your phone right now > you just never thought to do this

> 15 years old > opens Google Maps > finds a business with no website > copies their reviews > pastes into Claude > 2 minutes later - full website ready > calls the owner > sells it for $1,300 > did it in 6 minutes total > Google Maps is open on your phone right now > you just never thought to do this

Noisy

19,724 views • 4 months ago

Elon Musk: Apple and Google shouldn't have a heavy hand in their app stores. “Man, I sure hope we don't have to make a phone. That's a lot of work. The idea of making a phone makes me want to die. But if we have to make a phone, we will, but we will aspire not to make a phone. You know, I do think that the various companies, Apple and Google, Android and whatnot, they need to make sure they don't have a heavy hand in the app store, or they will create a forcing function for there to be a competitor. But man, I dread the idea of making a phone. But if that turns out to be necessary, we'll do it, but hopefully it is not necessary.” Town Hall in Philadelphia, October 18, 2024

Elon Musk: Apple and Google shouldn't have a heavy hand in their app stores. “Man, I sure hope we don't have to make a phone. That's a lot of work. The idea of making a phone makes me want to die. But if we have to make a phone, we will, but we will aspire not to make a phone. You know, I do think that the various companies, Apple and Google, Android and whatnot, they need to make sure they don't have a heavy hand in the app store, or they will create a forcing function for there to be a competitor. But man, I dread the idea of making a phone. But if that turns out to be necessary, we'll do it, but hopefully it is not necessary.” Town Hall in Philadelphia, October 18, 2024

ELON CLIPS

244,078 views • 1 year ago

Trailer for Tantura, a film about Israel's brutal massacre of Palestinians in 1948. Those clips of elderly Israelis confessing to sadistic war crimes? This is where they came from. It's available on Amazon Prime, Apple TV, iTunes, and Google Play. Everyone needs to see this.

Trailer for Tantura, a film about Israel's brutal massacre of Palestinians in 1948. Those clips of elderly Israelis confessing to sadistic war crimes? This is where they came from. It's available on Amazon Prime, Apple TV, iTunes, and Google Play. Everyone needs to see this.

99% Johnny Graz

24,099 views • 2 years ago

Sarah Guo (Conviction) says founders fear the wrong thing, because a giant like Google only ever has one A-team and your product is its 27th priority. "One really important thing for founders to think about is, who are you really competing with? If you are competing with Google Search and Google Ads, you're competing with the A-team at Google. They're pretty good, right? They do know how to do that stuff... But the vast majority of products that any large incumbent has is not staffed by the A-team, because there's only one A-team, right? And so if your product is the 27th priority for Google, it's actually not that scary."

Sarah Guo (Conviction) says founders fear the wrong thing, because a giant like Google only ever has one A-team and your product is its 27th priority. "One really important thing for founders to think about is, who are you really competing with? If you are competing with Google Search and Google Ads, you're competing with the A-team at Google. They're pretty good, right? They do know how to do that stuff... But the vast majority of products that any large incumbent has is not staffed by the A-team, because there's only one A-team, right? And so if your product is the 27th priority for Google, it's actually not that scary."

Fireside Alpha

276,157 views • 1 month ago

Sam Altman on competition with Google: ▫️a huge threat ▫️if they had taken OpenAI seriously in 2023, could have “smashed” the startup ▫️Google has “probably the greatest business model” in tech and hesitant to give it up ▫️this is opportunity for OpenAI, since it is redesigning the computing experience from scratch while Google is “bolting AI onto the existing way of doing things” ▫️he believes Google’s approach of “bolting AI” is a weakness “even though they have this huge distribution advantage.”

Sam Altman on competition with Google: ▫️a huge threat ▫️if they had taken OpenAI seriously in 2023, could have “smashed” the startup ▫️Google has “probably the greatest business model” in tech and hesitant to give it up ▫️this is opportunity for OpenAI, since it is redesigning the computing experience from scratch while Google is “bolting AI onto the existing way of doing things” ▫️he believes Google’s approach of “bolting AI” is a weakness “even though they have this huge distribution advantage.”

Bearly AI

412,002 views • 8 months ago

JUST IN: Google has fired 28 employees who participated in a 10-hour pro-Palestine protest at their New York and Sunnyvale, California offices. The protesters demanded Google pull out of their $1.2 billion cloud contract with Israel. They failed miserably. “This evening, Google indiscriminately fired 28 workers, including those among us who did not directly participate in yesterday’s historic, bicoastal 10-hour sit-in protests,” said the fired workers. “We cannot comprehend how [Google leadership] are able to sleep at night while their tech has enabled 100,000 Palestinians killed, reported missing, or wounded in the last six months of Israel’s genocide — and counting.”

JUST IN: Google has fired 28 employees who participated in a 10-hour pro-Palestine protest at their New York and Sunnyvale, California offices. The protesters demanded Google pull out of their $1.2 billion cloud contract with Israel. They failed miserably. “This evening, Google indiscriminately fired 28 workers, including those among us who did not directly participate in yesterday’s historic, bicoastal 10-hour sit-in protests,” said the fired workers. “We cannot comprehend how [Google leadership] are able to sleep at night while their tech has enabled 100,000 Palestinians killed, reported missing, or wounded in the last six months of Israel’s genocide — and counting.”

Collin Rugg

3,148,897 views • 2 years ago

Gokul explains the only three ways ads businesses make money, and why ChatGPT may be more valuable than Google and Facebook: "One, you need to own a very coveted group of users and you need to have a surface on which those users interact. Google Search is a great example. It's a surface on which a very coveted set of users interact with and express high intent, so Google is one of the most profitable ad businesses. Facebook, very similar. It took us a while to figure out what was coveted about these users. Turns out what was coveted was the identity. ChatGPT, their combination of intent and identity data is unparalleled. I mean, Google had intent data, but not identity. Facebook identity, but not intent. These things have both. Second, you deliver an outcome at a certain cost. The best example of this is a company called AppLovin. AppLovin is a $100 plus billion company. They drive one outcome really well: mobile app installs. The third way to do it is if you are the exclusive provider for a large advertiser or a large source of demand. A good example is The Trade Desk."

Gokul explains the only three ways ads businesses make money, and why ChatGPT may be more valuable than Google and Facebook: "One, you need to own a very coveted group of users and you need to have a surface on which those users interact. Google Search is a great example. It's a surface on which a very coveted set of users interact with and express high intent, so Google is one of the most profitable ad businesses. Facebook, very similar. It took us a while to figure out what was coveted about these users. Turns out what was coveted was the identity. ChatGPT, their combination of intent and identity data is unparalleled. I mean, Google had intent data, but not identity. Facebook identity, but not intent. These things have both. Second, you deliver an outcome at a certain cost. The best example of this is a company called AppLovin. AppLovin is a $100 plus billion company. They drive one outcome really well: mobile app installs. The third way to do it is if you are the exclusive provider for a large advertiser or a large source of demand. A good example is The Trade Desk."

Patrick OShaughnessy

47,449 views • 7 months ago

ELON: I HOPE APPLE AND GOOGLE WON’T FORCE US TO MAKE A PHONE “I sure hope we don't have to make a phone. That's a lot of work. The idea of making a phone makes me want to die. If we have to make a phone, we will, but we will aspire not to make a phone. I do think that the various companies and Apple and Google Android and whatnot, they need to make sure they don't have a heavy hand in like App Store and whatnot or they will create a forcing function for there to be a competitor. But man, I dread the idea of making a phone.” Source: Town Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, October 2024

ELON: I HOPE APPLE AND GOOGLE WON’T FORCE US TO MAKE A PHONE “I sure hope we don't have to make a phone. That's a lot of work. The idea of making a phone makes me want to die. If we have to make a phone, we will, but we will aspire not to make a phone. I do think that the various companies and Apple and Google Android and whatnot, they need to make sure they don't have a heavy hand in like App Store and whatnot or they will create a forcing function for there to be a competitor. But man, I dread the idea of making a phone.” Source: Town Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, October 2024

Mario Nawfal

271,471 views • 1 year ago

Google just did it again. They just launched "Google Skills" a free platform to turn anyone into an AI expert. 3,000+ courses, labs & certificates from Google Cloud, DeepMind, and Grow with Google all in one place. → Learn AI, data, and coding from real Google engineers → Earn credentials that actually get you hired → Build hands-on projects with Gemini Code Assist → Compete on global leaderboards and share your wins No paywalls. No BS. Just world-class AI education free. This might be the biggest AI upskilling move of the decade. 👉

Google just did it again. They just launched "Google Skills" a free platform to turn anyone into an AI expert. 3,000+ courses, labs & certificates from Google Cloud, DeepMind, and Grow with Google all in one place. → Learn AI, data, and coding from real Google engineers → Earn credentials that actually get you hired → Build hands-on projects with Gemini Code Assist → Compete on global leaderboards and share your wins No paywalls. No BS. Just world-class AI education free. This might be the biggest AI upskilling move of the decade. 👉

Alex Veremeyenko

41,920 views • 10 months ago

“A Google engineer took all the IP of how Google designed their AI chips, moved to China, and then started a company. DeepSeek came out of nowhere. Everyone was so surprised at how capable their model was—or they managed to have a high-end espionage operation to steal all of our trade secrets from the United States and then re-implement them back in China… The way he stole the data out of Google's corporate cloud was so stupid. He just copy-pasted all the code into Apple Notes, exported it to PDF, printed it, and then just walked out with it. That’s it.” Alexandr Wang

“A Google engineer took all the IP of how Google designed their AI chips, moved to China, and then started a company. DeepSeek came out of nowhere. Everyone was so surprised at how capable their model was—or they managed to have a high-end espionage operation to steal all of our trade secrets from the United States and then re-implement them back in China… The way he stole the data out of Google's corporate cloud was so stupid. He just copy-pasted all the code into Apple Notes, exported it to PDF, printed it, and then just walked out with it. That’s it.” Alexandr Wang

Shawn Ryan

558,582 views • 1 year ago

Google AI Studio Build Mode Review - I give it an 8/10. - comparable to other AI app builders in quality, but free to use (they must be losing money on this, no?) - turns simple/broad ideas into working micro apps in very short time... speed was impressive, actually - struggled with analyzing a YouTube video link, unfortunate since it's owned by Google - BIGGEST WIN: AI studio integrates with Google products and can build with existing data from those apps. Google Maps shown in demo below. It gets an 8/10 compared to other providers, largely because of the Google product integrations. Also, the burger at Spruce is fantastic.

Google AI Studio Build Mode Review - I give it an 8/10. - comparable to other AI app builders in quality, but free to use (they must be losing money on this, no?) - turns simple/broad ideas into working micro apps in very short time... speed was impressive, actually - struggled with analyzing a YouTube video link, unfortunate since it's owned by Google - BIGGEST WIN: AI studio integrates with Google products and can build with existing data from those apps. Google Maps shown in demo below. It gets an 8/10 compared to other providers, largely because of the Google product integrations. Also, the burger at Spruce is fantastic.

Allie K. Miller

23,290 views • 9 months ago