cd /news/artificial-intelligence/don-t-trust-the-marketing · home › topics › artificial-intelligence › article
[ARTICLE · art-162234] src=somethingbig.ai ↗ pub= topic=artificial-intelligence verified=true sentiment=↓ negative

Don't trust the marketing

Developer Theo reported that Google's Gemini 4 Argon was factually wrong on more than half of its claims in his coding tests, calling the model "a straight up liability," and some Google employees share doubts about the launch, according to Bloomberg. The newsletter author argues that launch-day benchmark charts from labs including Google and Meta do not predict real-world performance, and recommends users test a new model against their current one on three real tasks from the past week before switching.

by read2 min views1 publishedOct 19, 2026
Don't trust the marketing
Image: Somethingbig (auto-discovered)

A few weeks ago, Google launched Gemini 4 Argon with huge benchmark numbers. I said I'd believe it when I saw it.

Now people are using Gemini on real work, and it's not looking good. Theo, a developer who tests every new model, said it was factually wrong about more than half of its claims in his coding tests, and called it "a straight up liability." Some of Google's own employees have doubts too, according to Bloomberg.

Most of those complaints are about coding. So you might think: I don't write code, so who cares?

You should care, because most AI agents are coding agents under the hood, even when they don't look like it. When an AI assistant sorts your inbox, builds a spreadsheet or pulls together a report, it's usually writing and running little bits of code to get it done. You never see it. But if a model can't code reliably, it can't do that work reliably either.

And this isn't just about Google. Every launch comes with charts showing the new model beating everyone. The labs choose which tests to show, and models get tuned to do well on the popular ones. The demo is the best run out of many. Meta did the same thing last week, and the model is extremely weak in real-world use.

None of that tells you how a model will do on your work. So here's my suggestion: ignore launch day. Wait for the people who use these tools on real work every day to weigh in, and then test it yourself:

  1. Pick three real tasks you did last week, where you know what a good answer looks like.
  2. Give the exact same prompt to the new model and to the one you use now.
  3. Put the answers side by side. Check every detail. If the new model clearly looks better, keep exploring with it.

That's ten minutes, and you'll know more than any benchmark can tell you.

Don't want to do it by hand? This week I gave Pro members a skill that teaches your Claude or ChatGPT agent to run this test for you. Give it three real tasks and it runs both models, grades the answers and tells you which one to use. It's in Pro.

— Matt

What should I write about next? Vote or suggest a topic →

── more in #artificial-intelligence 4 stories · sorted by recency
── more on @google 3 stories trending now
sponsored brought to you by zahid.host 4,200+ EU-deployed projects
reading about agents? ship yours in a single git push.

Run your AI side-project on zahid.host

EU-based hosting, git-push deploys, automatic HTTPS, no cold starts. Free tier with a custom domain — perfect for shipping the agent you just read about.

$git push zahid main
→ Live at https://your-agent.zahid.host ✓
Get free account → Pricing
from €0/mo · no card required
LIVE [news/don-t-trust-the-mark…] indexed:0 read:2min 2026-10-19 · —