This Google Captcha is getting out of hand. YES IM A REAL PERSON

The retail Google services are great. Easy to use simple.

Anything on the business side is impossible.

Between launching an APP getting a website running in search getting an advertising campaign getting a business profile on maps. Impossible.

Been 3 days of just grinding through verifications and jumping through hoops to just unlock a new layer of admin.

It also keeps trying to sign everything into a bologna email I made for spam vs my preferred email.

Can’t believe I saw it finally

So I came across an advert claiming a program on my phone was out of date, and that if I did not update, i would lose data.

This is clearly trying to trick digitally illiterate people into downloading what is probably a dodgy app on to their phone. Regardless if the app itself is dodgy, this is a very corrupt advertising method that I would question is even legal.

I noticed they have over 9000 ads, however, so they're probably bringing Google a bit of cash, no doubt.

I've reported it again as advised, but I dont think anything will happen.

What a world we live in.

You were convenient and easy to use as long as you existed.

I wasn't even sure if this was even the correct Reddit location to ask about this, but Googles's new Summer 2027 internship has me intrigued. The preferred qualifications for this role are programming skills are as follows:

• Currently attending a degree program in the US and available to work full time for 12 weeks outside of university term time.
• Returning to a degree program after completion of the internship.
• Experience programming in three or more of the following languages: C, C++, C#, Java, JavaScript, Go, Python or similar.
• Experience with AI/ML, Infrastructure, web application development, Unix/Linux environments, mobile application development, distributed and parallel systems, machine learning, information retrieval, natural language processing, networking, developing large software systems, or security software development.

I'd mainly like to focus on the 3rd bullet point being "Experience programming in three or more of the following languages"

Would Google really require this proficiency from an intern? I mean the 4th bullet point kind of helps you out in telling you that they want you to have experience with AI/ML (Python AI centered projects), web application development (Javascript with React), Unix/Linux environments (C programming), and mobile application requirements (Javascript with React Native). As well as other requirements that can be accomplished with Python or with database management.

I will have the ability to display this on my resume through Python and Javascript but I've never interacted with Unix before, and wont until this upcoming semester. I'm wondering what exact intern would even be trusted with working on projects that would require expertise this wide. And if this position, in actuality, would require you to be doing all of this. And if so, what should I work on to be able to prove all of this on a resume

Google ragebaiting me rn

Hello there,

I have this reccurent problem when I am staying too long on a window I can no longer open a new tab.

Do you know what is the problem and how to fix it ?

Thanks

Effective 2nd September 2026, all phone backup data from Android phones will start counting towards Google Drive storage. Additionally, Google has reduced the Google Drive free storage size for new accounts without a phone number from 15gb to 5gb.

Sources:

Email (attachment)

9To5Google

PCWorld

Cuz im my whole household all google services didn't work

Google is pushing its automatic AI summaries so hard that the fonts for AI summaries are black and in a larger font, whereas all search results are faint, light gray, and a tiny font that are almost impossible to read. It’s a nasty practice.

See the crosspost please

I've been using Google since I was a kid. That's years of Google. And I'm tempted to delete it because there's no option to disable the ai search recommendations completely. Even upon typing -ai you still get the "what people are saying" tab which by the way is ai powered. I'm typing -ai because I want 0 ai not whatever this is. Google's favorite thing to recommend me though is temu and I haven't and never will buy anything from there I was trying to find a way to get rid of temu recommendations when I noticed upon typing -ai the search still had ai

Genuinely don't know how this was possible (I scrolled down the stupid AI overview, you guys can even check yourselves to see that there is only 1 result)

Word definitions:
Sesquipedalianist - someone who uses long and overcomplicated words
niqabs - plural of niqab, what Muslim women wear to cover all the face except eyes

It used to be that I could simply put into Google "[word] synonyms" and I'd be greeted, no, flooded with options. It was amazing: one of those rare instances on web when software does exactly 100% what you want it to do.

But, of course, they have to swing their A.I.-adoption everywhere they can, and so now instead of 50 synonym-list (which got so good over the last years it's bonkers), I get 5 synonyms, two of which are actually a mix of adjective+noun, and then another list below with, whoah, five more adjectives, also all of this like 5x less readable than the previous lists of synonyms.

If it's not broken, don't fix it. Just because A.I. exists, doesn't mean you absolutely have to put it in every nook and cranny of your product.

I own an iPhone but I want to buy Google storage instead of iCloud storage, cause I heard it’s more bang for your buck. I just don’t know which account I should choose to put it on. I mainly want it for more Google photos. I already have a few Google drives I share with my friends that have a lot of images in it, in one account. Should I buy more storage for that account? Or it’s not worth it because the storage would just overload with images I don’t want (I don’t need to keep ALL the photos on these drives)

Google’s decision to release Gemini 3.6 Flash before Gemini 3.5 Pro is not evidence that it has lost the AI race.

It is evidence that Google understands what actually matters.

The market judges AI companies by frontier-model capability: coding benchmarks, reasoning scores and leaderboard positions. But Google is not a standalone AI laboratory whose survival depends on owning the smartest model.

Google owns Search, Chrome, Android, Workspace, YouTube, advertising, Cloud, custom chips and global distribution.

Its objective is not to win every benchmark. Its objective is to deliver AI across billions of daily interactions without destroying margins.

That makes Flash—not Pro—the most strategically important Gemini model.

1. Flash Is the Model Google Actually Needs

Most AI interactions do not require frontier intelligence.

Search queries, summaries, translations, email assistance, document extraction, recommendations, advertising tools and individual agent steps are relatively simple, high-volume tasks.

For these workloads, speed, reliability and efficiency matter more than maximum intelligence.

This is especially true for Google. A small AI laboratory can tolerate an expensive model serving a limited number of premium users. Google must potentially serve AI across billions of searches, emails, documents, browser sessions and mobile devices.

At that scale, even a small inefficiency becomes enormous.

Google therefore does not need the smartest possible model for every interaction. It needs a model that is sufficiently capable, nearly instantaneous and efficient enough to deploy everywhere.

Flash is precisely that model.

Google’s advantage is not merely building intelligence. It is distributing useful intelligence through products people already use.

OpenAI and Anthropic must persuade users and enterprises to choose their models. Google can integrate Gemini directly into Search, Gmail, Chrome, Android, YouTube and Workspace.

Google does not need to win the model-selection screen.

It can eliminate the selection screen entirely.

2. Kimi K3 Shows Why Chasing SOTA Is Extremely Dangerous

Frontier-model development is becoming one of the most dangerous capital-allocation competitions in technology.

A laboratory can spend billions of dollars and months of engineering effort building the strongest model in the world, only for another company to approach or surpass it weeks later.

Kimi K3 is the perfect example.

A Chinese laboratory can release a model competitive with leading American systems and then distribute it through open weights. Whatever temporary advantage OpenAI, Anthropic or Google obtained from their previous training runs is immediately compressed.

The cost of frontier training is permanent.

Benchmark leadership is temporary.

This makes frontier capability a rapidly depreciating asset. Every new release weakens the economic value of the previous one, while open-source models accelerate commoditisation even further.

OpenAI and Anthropic must continue fighting because frontier capability is the foundation of their businesses. If they stop leading, their differentiation, pricing power and valuations come under pressure.

Google is different.

Its strongest assets—distribution, products, infrastructure, data centres, custom silicon and advertising integration—cannot be replicated by releasing another open model.

Google gains less from temporarily beating Anthropic on a coding benchmark than it gains from making AI cheaper and faster across its entire ecosystem.

Chasing every SOTA release would therefore be strategically irrational. Google would accept enormous capital costs to compete for an advantage that Kimi, DeepSeek or another open-source model could quickly erase.

The smarter strategy is to maintain frontier capability while refusing to treat temporary benchmark leadership as the company’s primary objective.

3. The Talent Departures Confirm the Divergence

The departure of leading Google AI researchers is widely interpreted as evidence that Google has become technically incapable.

The destinations suggest a different explanation.

Many of these researchers did not leave AI or join ordinary technology companies. They moved to OpenAI and Anthropic—the two organisations most aggressively focused on frontier-model development.

That reveals a divergence of objectives.

Google is increasingly optimising AI investment around product deployment, efficiency, margins and return on invested capital. Frontier researchers want maximum resources, autonomy and the opportunity to build the world’s strongest model.

When Google’s corporate objective shifts toward economic returns, researchers whose objective remains frontier supremacy naturally move to laboratories where that pursuit is the entire mission.

Their departure does not prove Google cannot build frontier models.

It shows that Google is no longer allowing frontier research to dictate the capital allocation of the entire company.

Technically, losing exceptional researchers is painful.

Economically, it can still be bullish.

The clearest evidence is where they went: not away from AI, but directly toward the organisations willing to spend most aggressively on the frontier race.

Google chose ROIC.

The researchers chose frontier research.

4. Frozen v2 Validates the Full-Stack Efficiency Strategy

The reported Frozen v2 chip project further validates this direction.

The rumoured chip would hardwire parts of Gemini directly into specialised hardware, potentially sacrificing flexibility in exchange for much greater inference efficiency.

That is not the strategy of a company obsessed only with winning the next benchmark.

It is the strategy of a company preparing to run its models at extraordinary scale.

Google is aligning every layer of the stack around the same objective:

models, software, compilers, custom chips, data centres and consumer products.

Flash represents the model strategy.

Frozen v2 represents the hardware strategy.

Both are focused on delivering more useful AI with less compute.

Competitors may temporarily produce a stronger model. But few can optimise the entire system—from the chip inside the data centre to the application used by billions of people.

That is Google’s real moat.

5. Releasing Gemini 3.6 Flash Before Pro Is the Clearest Signal

Google released Gemini 3.5 Flash and then quickly doubled down with Gemini 3.6 Flash before releasing Gemini 3.5 Pro.

That sequencing is highly revealing.

Google possesses internal data the market cannot see. It knows which models users select, which workloads dominate usage, where latency causes abandonment, which capabilities improve engagement and which models generate the strongest economic return.

The company would not prioritise another Flash generation before its delayed flagship unless the internal data strongly supported that decision.

The market sees Flash as the weaker model.

Google sees the model that users actually need and that it can deploy profitably across its ecosystem.

This is the central information asymmetry.

Outside observers judge Google through public benchmarks. Google judges its strategy through billions of real interactions.

Google knows where demand is growing, where users notice quality differences and where additional intelligence fails to justify additional compute.

Releasing 3.6 Flash before Pro strongly suggests that speed and efficiency are producing better commercial results than another marginal increase in frontier capability.

Google is not guessing.

It is following its internal data.

6. The Market Has Confused Capability With ROIC

OpenAI and Anthropic have trained the market to interpret constant frontier releases as the only meaningful form of progress.

A new model creates headlines. A higher benchmark score signals leadership. A delayed flagship is treated as failure.

This framework makes sense for companies whose models are their primary products.

It makes far less sense for Google.

OpenAI and Anthropic need continuous frontier leadership to maintain customer attention, attract capital and justify their enormous spending requirements. They cannot comfortably pause because the market may immediately question their competitive position.

Google does not face the same pressure.

It already has profitable products, enormous cash flow, global distribution and several ways to monetise AI indirectly. Gemini can create value by protecting Search, improving advertisements, strengthening Workspace, supporting Cloud and keeping users inside Google’s ecosystem.

The market has therefore confused two different concepts:

Frontier capability measures technical performance.

ROIC measures whether that performance creates economic value.

A company can lead every benchmark while destroying capital.

Another can rank lower while capturing much greater value from each unit of intelligence.

Investors are watching the leaderboard.

Google is watching the economics.

7. History Repeats Itself

Google has repeatedly appeared late, cautious or strategically confused—only to win once the market matured.

Chrome entered a browser market dominated by Microsoft.

Android followed the iPhone.

YouTube looked like an expensive, legally risky acquisition with weak economics.

Google Cloud spent years behind AWS and Microsoft.

In each case, Google was willing to lose the early narrative while building the distribution, infrastructure and economics that ultimately mattered.

The same pattern is now appearing in AI.

OpenAI, Anthropic and open-source laboratories are fighting for temporary frontier leadership. They are spending aggressively, bidding up talent costs and repeatedly making their previous models obsolete.

Google does not need to fight every battle on their timetable.

It can deploy efficient Flash models now, study which capabilities users genuinely value and preserve the option to intensify frontier investment when the economics become more attractive.

Google’s leaders think like wartime strategists: they are willing to concede individual battles to secure the terrain that determines the war.

That terrain is already theirs—Search, Chrome, Android, Workspace, YouTube, Cloud, custom chips and global distribution.

Google may lose benchmark cycles, product launches and frontier researchers.

History shows that this does not mean it is losing the war.

Google’s strategy has never been to win every fight.

It is to ensure that when the market finally consolidates, Google controls the infrastructure through which the value flows.

Verdict: Google is the US in WW2

Germany and Japan needed rapid victories because they lacked the resources to sustain a prolonged conflict. The United States could absorb early setbacks, expand industrial production and wait until its advantage in factories, logistics and resources became overwhelming.

The same logic applies to AI.

OpenAI and Anthropic must keep winning frontier-model battles because model leadership supports their funding, talent and commercial position. And they are doing this is a desperate way. Google does not face the same urgency. It already possesses enormous cash flow, data centres, custom chips, distribution and profitable products.

Google can tolerate temporary benchmark losses while building the AI equivalent of America’s wartime industrial machine: efficient models, specialised chips, infrastructure and global deployment.

Its competitors are fighting to own the strongest model today.

Google is building the capacity to serve AI everywhere tomorrow.

The market is watching individual battles (model releases).

Google is preparing to win the war, and will ultimately win the war.

I'm interested in Science but very much not interested in Space, Astronomy, Rocketry, etc. Most mornings 90% of Google Science News is space stuff, often ridiculous stuff like "Rare Harvest Moon". I've tried everything to steer my newsfeed away from space stuff to absolutely no avail, setting "not interested" seems to last only for that session. It seems Google doesn't know Math, Physics, Biology are also sciences

Im a staunch atheist and godamn american bonnevile paid for ads keep being served too me ( IN FRICKIN NEW ZEALAND OF ALL PLACES GET YOUR MISSIONARY COLONOZING ASS OUT OF HERE) ive reported them over 16 times now ( yes i know im still engaging with them but i clear my cache every time) AND THEYRE STILL BEING SHOWED HELP ME OUT OF THIS

I'm currently on a free 15 gig plan like I've always been for years, but I would love to buy a little more headroom like maybe 50 GB. The reason why I don't do it is because I can't pre-purchase years in advance and I don't like the idea of a very important Google account being subject to billing issues or other payments related issues in the future.

I think Google should consider offering a one-time fee for a lifetime upgrade. For example if they allowed me to permanently increase the storage on my account to 50GB, not offering any other features aside from that, I would gladly pay a large fee like $2k. If you put that into a 3% money market account that's easily averaging out to $5 per month, which gives them their monthly ROI anyways.