They've been my bet to win the AI race for a while. I was starting to doubt, but this 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8 arc has anchored me.

Totally agree. When this current wave of GenAI really started heating up, I guess 2020-2021, my analysis was very straightforward. What are the high level inputs to long-term success? I basically came up with a couple of criteria:

1. Data. Lots of data.

2. Money. Lots of money.

3. Access to necessary hardware.

4. Business alignment/will to do it.

5. Access to talent, current and future.

This is certainly incomplete/naive. In my mind, though, Google was the clear answer.

On a more personal level, I've been deep into the Google ecosystem since I got diederich@gmail.com in 2005. (I actually paid 50 cents on ebay to get a very early invite.) There was no question in my mind that Google's AI work would deeply integrate into their whole ecosystem in very powerful and productive ways. (Yes, I can join you to discuss, at length, the various ways that Google's dominance is problematic/scary.)

Having said all that, I'm quite happy that there is, at the moment, a very rich competitive landscape. Indeed, not too long ago, with Gemini Pro 3.1 languishing, I moved most of my deeper thinking work to ChatGPT, which was, for me at least, clearly outperforming Gemini.

While I certainly didn't anticipate it, Google's strategy of making their fast/relatively inexpensive models surprisingly powerful has been a welcomed surprise.