[trisfromgoogle]

I mean, many articles will have a negative cast because of the need for clicks -- e.g., the Verge's launch article is entitled "Google Gemma: because Google doesn’t want to give away Gemini yet" -- which I think is both an unfair characterization (given the free tier of Gemini Pro) and unnecessarily inflammatory.

Legitimate criticisms include not working correctly out of the box for llama.cpp due to repetition penalty and vocab size, some snafus on chat templates with huggingface, the fact that they're not larger-sized models, etc. Lots of the issues are already fixed, and we're committed to making sure these models are great.

Honestly, not sure what you're trying to get at here -- are you trying to "gotcha" the fact that not everything is perfect? That's true for any launch.

[cornel_io]

I think he's trying to bring up the racial image gen bias stuff that's going on with Gemini, but for some reason won't say it. He also doesn't appear to realize there is a difference between the two products/teams/launches...

[Permik]

I thought that reflecting what went poorly is really informative and inspiring! It really shows how you are taking this seriously, and iterating on a great project that you're building better and better, thanks for the insight and for a peek behind the curtain

[jart]

> Legitimate criticisms include not working correctly out of the box for llama.cpp

I don't think that's a legitimate criticism. Especially not for something that just launched. You should be helping your own project first, before you help others. For example, it'd be nice to see AVX2 work as well as AVX512 with gemma.cpp.