Google Launches Gemini 2.5 With Focus on Complex Reasoning and AI Agent Capabilities
The company described Gemini 2.5 as a thinking model that improves response accuracy by processing information more deeply before answering. According to a company blog post, the model analyzes data, applies context, draws logical conclusions, and makes decisionskey components of what it defines as reasoning in AI.
Gemini 2.5 is built on an upgraded base model combined with refined post-training, which Google said allows for better performance and supports the development of more capable and context-aware AI agents.
The launch includes Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental, described by Google as its most advanced model for complex, multimodal tasks. The company said it outperforms comparable models, including OpenAI's o3-mini and GPT-4.5, Claude's Sonnet 3.7, Grok 3 Beta, and DeepSeek's R1.
Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental is currently accessible through Google's AI Studio, the Gemini app for Advanced plan subscribers, and is expected to arrive on Vertex AI soon. Pricing details will be provided in the coming weeks.
This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
17 minutes ago
- Business Insider
The 'late-night decision' that led to ChatGPT's name
"Chat with GPT-3.5" doesn't really roll off the tongue, but it's almost what OpenAI named ChatGPT. On the latest episode of the OpenAI podcast, two leadersinvolved with the chatbot's development, research chief Mark Chen and head of ChatGPT Nick Turley, spoke about the days leading up to the launch that made the tool go viral. "It was going to be Chat with GPT-3.5, and we had a late-night decision to simplify" the name, Turley said on the podcast published July 1. The team made the name change the day before the version's late 2022 launch, he said. "We realized that that would be hard to pronounce and came up with a great name instead," Turley said. They settled on ChatGPT, short for "generative pre-trained transformer." Since then, ChatGPT has gained millions of users who turn to the chatbot for everything from routine web searches to guidance on how to give a friend career advice. Rivals, including Meta AI, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek, have also sprung up. Before ChatGPT's launch, few within OpenAI expected the name to be so consequential, said Andrew Mayne, the podcast host and OpenAI's former science communicator. He said the chatbot's capabilities were largely similar to those of previous versions. The main differences included a more user-friendly interface and, of course, the name. "It's the same thing, but we just put the interface in here and made it so you didn't have to prompt as much," Mayne said on the podcast. After OpenAI launched ChatGPT, though, the chatbot took off, with Reddit users as far away as Japan experimenting with it, Turley said. It soon became clear that ChatGPT's popularity wasn't going to fade quickly and that the tool was "going to change the world," he said. "We've had so many launches, so many previews over time, and this one really was something else," Chen said on the podcast. ChatGPT's success represented another kind of milestone for Chen: "My parents just stopped asking me to go work for Google," he said.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Behind the Curtain: Zuck's AI moonshot
Mark Zuckerberg — in an unprecedented, multibillion-dollar talent raid — has dramatically reset the market for blue-chip AI builders, and further complicated the government's ability to stack its own technology bench. Why it matters: The Meta CEO is trying to lure talent from OpenAI and other tech companies with offers that can top $100 million in total compensation for the first year alone — beyond most star athletes' pay. Top-tier pay packages being offered by Meta for AI researchers can reach up to $300 million over four years, WIRED reports. A tech-news feed on X used a baseball card motif to portray an OpenAI researcher being "TRADED" to Meta. The talent derby has sent compensation soaring across AI, as rivals scramble to keep top talent and entice others not to flirt with Meta and other suitors. It's partly a continuation of an ongoing recruiting war — OpenAI built its lab with the help of some massive comp packages. Zuckerberg unveiled his dream team this week as Meta Superintelligence Labs (MSL), after meeting personally with potential recruits at his homes in Palo Alto and Lake Tahoe. The big picture: America has witnessed staggering valuations for startups. But never before have we seen company-valuation-sized salaries for people, rather than ideas or enterprises. That's injecting a new layer of drama and next-level economics for the biggest companies — many the size of nation-states — racing to win the AI wars. Collateral damage: The U.S. government is already struggling to recruit top researchers and scientists. A remotely talented AI specialist can now assume that riches in the tens of millions are attainable. So why sacrifice to serve in government? China, by contrast, can command top talent to work on government projects. A front-page Wall Street Journal story on Wednesday, "China Is Quickly Eroding America's Lead in the Global AI Race," said AI models from Chinese companies, including DeepSeek and Alibaba, are becoming popular in Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Zoom in: Zuckerberg's biggest single bet was investing $14 billion in Scale AI, and bringing co-founder Alex Wang to Meta as chief AI officer. Former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman will lead Meta's work on AI products and applied research. Eleven other new AI star hires were listed in Zuckerberg's internal memo announcing Meta Superintelligence Labs. Altman hit back at Zuckerberg's spree this week, telling OpenAI researchers in a Slack message that Meta "has gotten a few great people for sure, but on the whole, it is hard to overstate how much they didn't get their top people and had to go quite far down their list," WIRED reports. "I am proud of how mission-oriented our industry is as a whole; of course there will always be some mercenaries," Altman added. "Missionaries will beat mercenaries." Between the lines: Tech investors tell us that until very recently, the revenue outlook for AI models was unclear, and there was a debate about the return on capital spending. Now it's apparent that leading AI companies will do hundreds of billions in revenue per year. OpenAI is enjoying rampaging growth: The company said last month that it has $10 billion in annual recurring revenue, just 2½ years after the launch of ChatGPT — up from $5.5 billion last year. OpenAI has projected for investors that, fueled by AI agents and other new products, sales could total as much as $125 billion in 2029 and $174 billion in 2030, according to documents seen by The Information. Anthropic — a rival AI company led by Dario Amodei, an OpenAI alumnus — has hit a pace of $4 billion in revenue annually, up almost four times from January, The Information reported this week. At those rates of growth, you can see what Zuckerberg is seeing — and why he's suddenly pouring massive spending into making sure Meta remains a dominant AI player. The backstory: Zuckerberg is repeating a winning playbook. By 2012, he realized Facebook was behind on the mobile web. He famously redirected the entire company toward catching up. Facebook bought Instagram for $1 billion and later WhatsApp for $16 billion — racing ahead in areas where others had innovated. But this time he's betting on individuals, rather than successful enterprises. Reality check: Meta has spent a fortune on Llama, its large-language model (LLM), in an effort to develop a frontier model that can compete with OpenAI's ChatGPT, Anthropic's Claude and Google's Gemini. In a splashy story about " The List" of AI geniuses Zuckerberg is courting, the Wall Street Journal said Meta's "laggard history in generative AI has made some recruits hesitant." Bubbles can burst. AI salaries and data-center costs won't be sustainable without the ultimate payoff being unimaginably huge. And the more these companies spend, the bigger that payoff needs to be. As uncovered by a survey Axios reported last month, many small businesses using AI aren't even paying for it. The other side: Altman, noting that OpenAI has built "a culture that is good at repeatable innovation," said last month on a podcast hosted by Jack Altman, his younger brother, that Meta was making "giant offers to a lot of people on our team — like $100 million signing bonuses" and more than that in annual compensation. "We're set up such that if we succeed ... then everybody will do great financially," Sam Altman said. "[I]t's incentive-aligned with mission-first, and then economic rewards and everything else flowing from that." The bottom line: The bidding war is the most public manifestation of the secret race among AI giants — all betting that the technology will bring trillions of dollars in productivity gains. For them, the timeline is the biggest question.
Android Authority
an hour ago
- Android Authority
Here's why everyone is using YouTube Music — even if they don't love it!
Joe Maring / Android Authority Not many years ago, if you mentioned YouTube Music in a room full of long-time Google Play Music users, you could probably hear their collective sigh from space. Google retired its beloved service in 2020 and replaced it with something that, at the time, felt underbaked to be a true music player. Fast-forward to 2025, and while the groans haven't completely died down, nearly everyone we know, including our readers, is using YouTube Music. This revelation came straight from an open discussion we're currently running on Android Authority. With over 8,000 votes and counting, the majority of respondents say that YouTube Music is their music streaming service of choice, not Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, or anything else. YouTube Music has emerged as the king, albeit not the most elegant ruler, but a practical one that people appreciate for its convenience. What is your current music streaming platform? 8532 votes YouTube Music 79 % Spotify 12 % Apple Music 3 % Deezer 1 % Tidal 2 % Amazon Music 1 % Pandora 1 % Another service (mention in the comments) 1 % The numbers make sense Joe Maring / Android Authority You have to admit that making YouTube Music a part of the YouTube Premium subscription was a genius move by Google. We definitely expected some strong opinions when we asked our readers about their preferred streaming service, but what we didn't expect was an overwhelming pattern that emerged. People aren't picking YouTube Music because of its vast music library or algorithmic genius. They're picking it because it makes the most sense economically. 'YT Music does everything I want and more at an affordable price (which includes YouTube Premium),' remarked another, in a long list of comments that echo the same sentiments. The YouTube Premium family plan is the real hook 'Can't beat the cost of YTM when you have a family plan,' a reader said. Cost-efficiency is one of the top reasons why people pick YouTube Music over other music streaming services. Not only does a YouTube Premium plan give you free access to millions of YouTube Music songs ad-free, offline, and while your screen is locked, but the YouTube Premium family plan is the real hook. For $22.99 per month, you can use YouTube Music without ads on up to five accounts! That's a tough one to beat for the likes of Spotify, which also offers a family plan, but one that doesn't come with a tasty side of YouTube Premium. It's not love, it's logistics Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority For many YouTube Music users, the journey began with Google Play Music's forced retirement, followed by the chaotic migration to YouTube Music. Playlists were moved, preferences were ported (sometimes badly), and the new interface took a lot of getting used to. In fact, some folks never got used to it at all. And yet, they stayed. That's because years of their accumulated music on Google Play Music moved to YouTube Music. One of our readers said, 'I use it because it's where all my music from Google Play Music went. I absolutely detest any algorithm for music. The vast majority of what I listen to is music I have bought or the 500 CDs I own and uploaded to GPM.' Clearly, when Google Play Music was migrated to YouTube Music, people didn't just want to lose all their valuable collections painfully built over time, so they stuck with YouTube Music and have been hanging on ever since. YouTube Music: The unofficial king of local, live, and forgotten content Joe Hindy / Android Authority A big advantage YouTube Music has over most global streaming giants is the availability of regional, live, obscure, and old music. The streaming service decidedly excels at it. Android Authority readers (including yours truly) acknowledge how nearly impossible it is to find specific live music, covers, local songs, old, forgotten tracks, and music from smaller countries on Spotify or Apple Music. You know where those songs almost always do exist? YouTube Music. 'One area where YouTube Music really stands out is the sheer volume of original albums available. My primary interest is the original rock era of 1964-1980. YouTube Music has virtually every original studio album from that era, by artists that matter,' said a reader. YouTube Music is a treasure trove for indie music lovers. Because YouTube Music pulls directly from YouTube's massive video library, including fan uploads, niche recordings, and regional hits, it becomes a treasure trove for indie music lovers. If someone in your country uploaded a remix of an old classic? You'll probably find it on YouTube Music. 'All the services have at least one thing where they excel over others; it just depends on what value you place on the differing features. In YTM's case, it's the ability to find live versions of tracks that I like the most. Other platforms will outperform it in other areas (such as streaming quality), but I place a high value on listening to live music, so it's the best option for me (that, plus I already pay for YT Premium anyway),' noted another reader. This is where the platform quietly wins hearts. Not with fancy recommendations or slick design, but with simple access to stuff that actually matters to you. So why aren't people raving about YouTube Music? Despite all this, very few people claim to actually really 'love' YouTube Music. It's not the darling of Reddit discussions. It doesn't drop surprise features that get headlines (unless you're into AI-generated playlists). Its recommendations algorithm, streaming quality, and UI still spark debates. And yes, some erstwhile Google Play Music users still feel stuck, with no other alternative. If you're a die-hard Spotify fan or an Apple Music lover, we get it. These platforms offer polish, clever integrations, better connectivity, and great personalized recommendations. But YouTube Music is everyman's streamer, and it's only getting better. It's the 'eh, might as well' option that just so happens to make sense financially, culturally, and practically.
