309 items tagged “google”
2024
OpenAI and Anthropic focused on building models and not worrying about products. For example, it took 6 months for OpenAI to bother to release a ChatGPT iOS app and 8 months for an Android app!
Google and Microsoft shoved AI into everything in a panicked race, without thinking about which products would actually benefit from AI and how they should be integrated.
Both groups of companies forgot the “make something people want” mantra. The generality of LLMs allowed developers to fool themselves into thinking that they were exempt from the need to find a product-market fit, as if prompting is a replacement for carefully designed products or features. [...]
But things are changing. OpenAI and Anthropic seem to be transitioning from research labs focused on a speculative future to something resembling regular product companies. If you take all the human-interest elements out of the OpenAI boardroom drama, it was fundamentally about the company's shift from creating gods to building products.
hangout_services/thunk.js
(via)
It turns out Google Chrome (via Chromium) includes a default extension which makes extra services available to code running on the *.google.com domains - tweeted about today by Luca Casonato, but the code has been there in the public repo since October 2013 as far as I can tell.
It looks like it's a way to let Google Hangouts (or presumably its modern predecessors) get additional information from the browser, including the current load on the user's CPU. Update: On Hacker News a Googler confirms that the Google Meet "troubleshooting" feature uses this to review CPU utilization.
I got GPT-4o to help me figure out how to trigger it (I tried Claude 3.5 Sonnet first but it refused, saying "Doing so could potentially violate terms of service or raise security and privacy concerns"). Paste the following into your Chrome DevTools console on any Google site to see the result:
chrome.runtime.sendMessage(
"nkeimhogjdpnpccoofpliimaahmaaome",
{ method: "cpu.getInfo" },
(response) => {
console.log(JSON.stringify(response, null, 2));
},
);
I get back a response that starts like this:
{
"value": {
"archName": "arm64",
"features": [],
"modelName": "Apple M2 Max",
"numOfProcessors": 12,
"processors": [
{
"usage": {
"idle": 26890137,
"kernel": 5271531,
"total": 42525857,
"user": 10364189
}
}, ...
The code doesn't do anything on non-Google domains.
Luca says this - I'm inclined to agree:
This is interesting because it is a clear violation of the idea that browser vendors should not give preference to their websites over anyone elses.
Chrome Prompt Playground.
Google Chrome Canary is currently shipping an experimental on-device LLM, in the form of Gemini Nano. You can access it via the new window.ai API, after first enabling the "Prompt API for Gemini Nano" experiment in chrome://flags (and then waiting an indeterminate amount of time for the ~1.7GB model file to download - I eventually spotted it in ~/Library/Application Support/Google/Chrome Canary/OptGuideOnDeviceModel).
I got Claude 3.5 Sonnet to build me this playground interface for experimenting with the model. You can execute prompts, stream the responses and all previous prompts and responses are stored in localStorage.
Here's the full Sonnet transcript, and the final source code for the app.
The best documentation I've found for the new API is is explainers-by-googlers/prompt-api on GitHub.
gemma-2-27b-it-llamafile (via) Justine Tunney shipped llamafile packages of Google's new openly licensed (though definitely not open source) Gemma 2 27b model this morning.
I downloaded the gemma-2-27b-it.Q5_1.llamafile version (20.5GB) to my Mac, ran chmod 755 gemma-2-27b-it.Q5_1.llamafile and then ./gemma-2-27b-it.Q5_1.llamafile and now I'm trying it out through the llama.cpp default web UI in my browser. It works great.
It's a very capable model - currently sitting at position 12 on the LMSYS Arena making it the highest ranked open weights model - one position ahead of Llama-3-70b-Instruct and within striking distance of the GPT-4 class models.
Why Google’s AI might recommend you mix glue into your pizza. I got “distrust and verify” as advice on using LLMs into this Washington Post piece by Shira Ovide.
I just left Google last month. The "AI Projects" I was working on were poorly motivated and driven by this panic that as long as it had "AI" in it, it would be great. This myopia is NOT something driven by a user need. It is a stone cold panic that they are getting left behind.
The vision is that there will be a Tony Stark like Jarvis assistant in your phone that locks you into their ecosystem so hard that you'll never leave. That vision is pure catnip. The fear is that they can't afford to let someone else get there first.
Some goofy results from ‘AI Overviews’ in Google Search. John Gruber collects two of the best examples of Google’s new AI overviews going horribly wrong.
Gullibility is a fundamental trait of all LLMs, and Google’s new feature apparently doesn’t know not to parrot ideas it picked up from articles in the Onion, or jokes from Reddit.
I’ve heard that LLM providers internally talk about “screenshot attacks”—bugs where the biggest risk is that someone will take an embarrassing screenshot.
In Google search’s case this class of bug feels like a significant reputational threat.
Understand errors and warnings better with Gemini (via) As part of Google's Gemini-in-everything strategy, Chrome DevTools now includes an opt-in feature for passing error messages in the JavaScript console to Gemini for an explanation, via a lightbulb icon.
Amusingly, this documentation page includes a warning about prompt injection:
Many of LLM applications are susceptible to a form of abuse known as prompt injection. This feature is no different. It is possible to trick the LLM into accepting instructions that are not intended by the developers.
They include a screenshot of a harmless example, but I'd be interested in hearing if anyone has a theoretical attack that could actually cause real damage here.
But where the company once limited itself to gathering low-hanging fruit along the lines of “what time is the super bowl,” on Tuesday executives showcased generative AI tools that will someday plan an entire anniversary dinner, or cross-country-move, or trip abroad. A quarter-century into its existence, a company that once proudly served as an entry point to a web that it nourished with traffic and advertising revenue has begun to abstract that all away into an input for its large language models.
PaliGemma model README (via) One of the more over-looked announcements from Google I/O yesterday was PaliGemma, an openly licensed VLM (Vision Language Model) in the Gemma family of models.
The model accepts an image and a text prompt. It outputs text, but that text can include special tokens representing regions on the image. This means it can return both bounding boxes and fuzzier segment outlines of detected objects, behavior that can be triggered using a prompt such as "segment puffins".
You can try it out on Hugging Face.
It's a 3B model, making it feasible to run on consumer hardware.
Context caching for Google Gemini (via) Another new Gemini feature announced today. Long context models enable answering questions against large chunks of text, but the price of those long prompts can be prohibitive—$3.50/million for Gemini Pro 1.5 up to 128,000 tokens and $7/million beyond that.
Context caching offers a price optimization, where the long prefix prompt can be reused between requests, halving the cost per prompt but at an additional cost of $4.50 / 1 million tokens per hour to keep that context cache warm.
Given that hourly extra charge this isn’t a default optimization for all cases, but certain high traffic applications might be able to save quite a bit on their longer prompt systems.
It will be interesting to see if other vendors such as OpenAI and Anthropic offer a similar optimization in the future.
How developers are using Gemini 1.5 Pro’s 1 million token context window. I got to be a talking head for a few seconds in an intro video for today's Google I/O keynote, talking about how I used Gemini Pro 1.5 to index my bookshelf (and with a cameo from my squirrel nutcracker). I'm at 1m25s.
(Or at 10m6s in the full video of the keynote)
Everything Google’s Python team were responsible for. In a questionable strategic move, Google laid off the majority of their internal Python team a few days ago. Someone on Hacker News asked what the team had been responsible for, and team member zem relied with this fascinating comment providing detailed insight into how the team worked and indirectly how Python is used within Google.
The blog post announcing the shutdown was done one day early. The idea was to take the opportunity of the new Pope being announced and Andy Rubin being replaced as head of Android, so that the [Google] Reader news may be drowned out. PR didn't apparently realize that the kinds of people that care about the other two events (especially the Pope) are not the same kind of people that care about Reader, so it didn't work.
Google NotebookLM Data Exfiltration (via) NotebookLM is a Google Labs product that lets you store information as sources (mainly text files in PDF) and then ask questions against those sources—effectively an interface for building your own custom RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) chatbots.
Unsurprisingly for anything that allows LLMs to interact with untrusted documents, it’s susceptible to prompt injection.
Johann Rehberger found some classic prompt injection exfiltration attacks: you can create source documents with instructions that cause the chatbot to load a Markdown image that leaks other private data to an external domain as data passed in the query string.
Johann reported this privately in the December but the problem has not yet been addressed. UPDATE: The NotebookLM team deployed a fix for this on 18th April.
A good rule of thumb is that any time you let LLMs see untrusted tokens there is a risk of an attack like this, so you should be very careful to avoid exfiltration vectors like Markdown images or even outbound links.
Gemini 1.5 Pro public preview (via) Huge release from Google: Gemini 1.5 Pro—the GPT-4 competitive model with the incredible 1 million token context length—is now available without a waitlist in 180+ countries (including the USA but not Europe or the UK as far as I can tell)... and the API is free for 50 requests/day (rate limited to 2/minute).
Beyond that you’ll need to pay—$7/million input tokens and $21/million output tokens, which is slightly less than GPT-4 Turbo and a little more than Claude 3 Sonnet.
They also announced audio input (up to 9.5 hours in a single prompt), system instruction support and a new JSON mod.
Before Google Reader was shut down, they were internally looking for maintainers. It turned out you have to deal with three years of infra migrations if you sign up to be the new owner of Reader. No one wanted that kind of job for a product that is not likely to grow 10x.
llm-gemini 0.1a1. I upgraded my llm-gemini plugin to add support for the new Google Gemini Pro 1.5 model, which is beginning to roll out in early access.
The 1.5 model supports 1,048,576 input tokens and generates up to 8,192 output tokens—a big step up from Gemini 1.0 Pro which handled 30,720 and 2,048 respectively.
The big missing feature from my LLM tool at the moment is image input—a fantastic way to take advantage of that huge context window. I have a branch for this which I really need to get into a useful state.
900 Sites, 125 million accounts, 1 vulnerability (via) Google’s Firebase development platform encourages building applications (mobile an web) which talk directly to the underlying data store, reading and writing from “collections” with access protected by Firebase Security Rules.
Unsurprisingly, a lot of development teams make mistakes with these.
This post describes how a security research team built a scanner that found over 124 million unprotected records across 900 different applications, including huge amounts of PII: 106 million email addresses, 20 million passwords (many in plaintext) and 27 million instances of “Bank details, invoices, etc”.
Most worrying of all, only 24% of the site owners they contacted shipped a fix for the misconfiguration.
Google Scholar search: “certainly, here is” -chatgpt -llm (via) Searching Google Scholar for “certainly, here is” turns up a huge number of academic papers that include parts that were evidently written by ChatGPT—sections that start with “Certainly, here is a concise summary of the provided sections:” are a dead giveaway.
The killer app of Gemini Pro 1.5 is video
Last week Google introduced Gemini Pro 1.5, an enormous upgrade to their Gemini series of AI models.
[... 2,839 words]Gemma: Introducing new state-of-the-art open models. Google get in on the openly licensed LLM game: Gemma comes in two sizes, 2B and 7B, trained on 2 trillion and 6 trillion tokens respectively. The terms of use “permit responsible commercial usage”. In the benchmarks it appears to compare favorably to Mistral and Llama 2.
Something that caught my eye in the terms: “Google may update Gemma from time to time, and you must make reasonable efforts to use the latest version of Gemma.”
One of the biggest benefits of running your own model is that it can protect you from model updates that break your carefully tested prompts, so I’m not thrilled by that particular clause.
UPDATE: It turns out that clause isn’t uncommon—the phrase “You shall undertake reasonable efforts to use the latest version of the Model” is present in both the Stable Diffusion and BigScience Open RAIL-M licenses.
Our next-generation model: Gemini 1.5 (via) The big news here is about context length: Gemini 1.5 (a Mixture-of-Experts model) will do 128,000 tokens in general release, available in limited preview with a 1 million token context and has shown promising research results with 10 million tokens!
1 million tokens is 700,000 words or around 7 novels—also described in the blog post as an hour of video or 11 hours of audio.
One consideration is that such a deep ML system could well be developed outside of Google-- at Microsoft, Baidu, Yandex, Amazon, Apple, or even a startup. My impression is that the Translate team experienced this. Deep ML reset the translation game; past advantages were sort of wiped out. Fortunately, Google's huge investment in deep ML largely paid off, and we excelled in this new game. Nevertheless, our new ML-based translator was still beaten on benchmarks by a small startup. The risk that Google could similarly be beaten in relevance by another company is highlighted by a startling conclusion from BERT: huge amounts of user feedback can be largely replaced by unsupervised learning from raw text. That could have heavy implications for Google.
Google’s Gemini Advanced: Tasting Notes and Implications. Ethan Mollick reviews the new Google Gemini Advanced—a rebranded Bard, released today, that runs on the GPT-4 competitive Gemini Ultra model.
“GPT-4 [...] has been the dominant AI for well over a year, and no other model has come particularly close. Prior to Gemini, we only had one advanced AI model to look at, and it is hard drawing conclusions with a dataset of one. Now there are two, and we can learn a few things.”
I like Ethan’s use of the term “tasting notes” here. Reminds me of how Matt Webb talks about being a language model sommelier.
Google Research: Lumiere. The latest in text-to-video from Google Research, described as “a text-to-video diffusion model designed for synthesizing videos that portray realistic, diverse and coherent motion”.
Most existing text-to-video models generate keyframes and then use other models to fill in the gaps, which frequently leads to a lack of coherency. Lumiere “generates the full temporal duration of the video at once”, which avoids this problem.
Disappointingly but unsurprisingly the paper doesn’t go into much detail on the training data, beyond stating “We train our T2V model on a dataset containing 30M videos along with their text caption. The videos are 80 frames long at 16 fps (5 seconds)”.
The examples of “stylized generation” which combine a text prompt with a single reference image for style are particularly impressive.
And now, in Anno Domini 2024, Google has lost its edge in search. There are plenty of things it can’t find. There are compelling alternatives. To me this feels like a big inflection point, because around the stumbling feet of the Big Tech dinosaurs, the Web’s mammals, agile and flexible, still scurry. They exhibit creative energy and strongly-flavored voices, and those voices still sometimes find and reinforce each other without being sock puppets of shareholder-value-focused private empires.
— Tim Bray
2023
Google DeepMind used a large language model to solve an unsolvable math problem. I’d been wondering how long it would be before we saw this happen: a genuine new scientific discovery found with the aid of a Large Language Model.
DeepMind found a solution to the previously open “cap set” problem using Codey, a fine-tuned variant of PaLM 2 specializing in code. They used it to generate Python code and found a solution after “a couple of million suggestions and a few dozen repetitions of the overall process”.
Hacking Google Bard—From Prompt Injection to Data Exfiltration (via) Bard recently grew extension support, allowing it access to a user’s personal documents. Here’s the first reported prompt injection attack against that.
This kind of attack against LLM systems is inevitable any time you combine access to private data with exposure to untrusted inputs. In this case the attack vector is a Google Doc shared with the user, containing prompt injection instructions that instruct the model to encode previous data into an URL and exfiltrate it via a markdown image.
Google’s CSP headers restrict those images to *.google.com—but it turns out you can use Google AppScript to run your own custom data exfiltration endpoint on script.google.com.
Google claim to have fixed the reported issue—I’d be interested to learn more about how that mitigation works, and how robust it is against variations of this attack.
Google was accidentally leaking its Bard AI chats into public search results. I’m quoted in this piece about yesterday’s Bard privacy bug: it turned out the share URL and “Let anyone with the link see what you’ve selected” feature wasn’t correctly setting a noindex parameter, and so some shared conversations were being swept up by the Google search crawlers. Thankfully this was a mistake, not a deliberate design decision, and it should be fixed by now.