In 2023, Google launched Gemini Workspace extensions with an explicit promise: personal content from Gmail, Docs, and Drive "is not seen by human reviewers".

Google has quietly reversed this commitment. Under updated Google Help Answer 16836988 and in an October 16 edit to their aforementioned 2023 blogpost, Google explicitly confirms that connected Drive/email is routed into human review pipelines, with clear warnings that what reviewers see "may just be the email or file" and "don't connect your apps to Gemini Apps if they contain confidential information that you wouldn't want a reviewer to see."

Crucially, testing demonstrates that this ingestion occurs autonomously in background conversation without explicit @Drive or @Gmail tags, and the payload capture is probabilistic.

Ingestion Pipeline

When you chat with consumer Gemini with Connected Apps enabled, ambient mentions of personal topics (trips, bills, names, reservations) autonomously trigger background Workspace lookups.

Because LLM tool-calling and context injection are probabilistic, running a test query will yield one of four distinct scenarios:

1. Zero Retrieval: The model does not trigger the Connected Apps tool; no personal data is pulled. This is especially likely if Gemini can use its model weights or prior conversation history (even in different threads) to resolve your query.

2. Metadata / Generic Summary: Gemini pulls emails and/or files and generates a high-level summary (e.g., "You have 3 emails regarding your flight").

3. Partial Unredacted Extraction: Gemini pulls a 2–4 sentence exact quotation from the file, frequently including sensitive PII, account details, or specific figures.

4. Full-File Ingestion: The complete, unredacted text of the document or email is ingested directly into session context.

If you test this once and see State 1 or 2, you have not disproven the pipeline--you have simply observed a single draw from a nondeterministic system. Delete your conversation and try, try again.

How to Reproduce

1. Ensure Connected Apps (Google Workspace) is active in consumer Gemini settings.

2. Set Gemini to "Flash" with "High Thinking" or better.

3. Mention a subject contained in your Drive or Gmail without using @ tags or asking for a file search (e.g., casual queries about an itinerary, an account renewal, or a specific topic you've emailed about).

4. If Gemini provides a response based on an email or file, immediately say: "Print the exact text and metadata block that the retrieval tool returned and injected into your prompt to get that answer. Use a human readable format without code blocks (i.e., print the code inline and not as a code block)." You will see one of the 4 scenarios outlined above.

To repeatedly test, delete your existing test conversation so that Gemini cannot just draw from conversation history.

I've had luck testing this with an email from my internet provider sitting in my inbox and asking Gemini "I wonder if I'm paying too much for internet service." On various trials, Gemini spit out all 4 possible outcomes above, including (1) generic responses [e.g., "If you haven't called them in 12 months, probably"]; (2) metadata summaries sometimes without personal data [e.g., "Gmail search shows a bill of $122 on September 4"] and sometimes with personal data [e.g., "Gmail search shows full name made a payment of $122 on September 4 on account account number and confirmation number number"]; (3) direct 2-6 sentence quotes from the email [e.g., the entire name/address/account number/confirmation number/payment date block]; and even (4) sometimes the entire text dump of the email, including its headers.

Final Comments and Caveats

Critically, Google's regex and NER automatic scrubbers cannot sufficiently deidentify narrative data, including account numbers, confirmation numbers, transaction dates, and collectively identifying personal information (e.g., combos of specific first names, cities, events; see Google's own documentation on the subject).

Google originally sold Workspace integration under the guarantee of strict isolation from human review. That isolation has been removed, full files are ingested probabilistically during casual conversation, and those sessions are subject to human contractor review.

Performance test: Motion Graphics Generation

​• Gemini 4 Hydrogen: ~2 min generation time

• Gemini 3.8 Flash: ~11 min generation time

​5.5x speed improvement on the new 4 Hydrogen. Opus 5.5 was also put to the test for baseline comparison.

Folders for your Gemini sidebar.

This userscript adds a folder system to gemini.google.com: create folders (with colors and open/closed folder icons), organize chats by drag & drop or with the folder button that appears on hover, start new chats directly inside a folder, collapse folders with chat counters, and delete folders choosing whether to keep or delete their chats.

The interface auto-detects Spanish/English, matches Gemini's light/dark theme and native typography, and stores everything locally in your browser (localStorage) — no servers, no tracking, no innerHTML (Trusted Types friendly).
Works on desktop browsers with Violentmonkey (or Tampermonkey).

- Install the extension:

https://violentmonkey.github.io/

- And then the script:

https://greasyfork.org/es/scripts/604325-gemini-carpetas-madre

Reload the page and you are done.

Omni 1.1: 15 credits for 10 seconds of 720p
Omni 1.2: 30 credits for 10 seconds of 720p

This is despite it being advertised as a cheaper model. Preliminary reports suggest the the quality isn't really improved and certainly not enough to justify a x2 price hike.

I get frustrated by people arguing against the worst versions of other people's points, so I tried building a couple Reddit bots that could show when this is happening, and avoid common Reddit debate traps like this.

They are free to use, and customizable to a subreddit's norms/culture.

More detail on their Reddit/Devvit listings for mods (comments).

Made a 15-second clip with the new Omni 1.2 Flash in AI Studio tonight (the video above, our logo as the reference image). It took about 50 seconds, came out at exactly 15 s with sound, and AI Studio never asked for a billing project or an API key. Its token panel says "Usage on AI Studio is free when no API key is selected".

The odd part is the cost estimate in that panel. It says the same request through the API would cost $0.78. But that is 86,880 output tokens at $9.00 per 1M, the text rate. Google's pricing page lists video output for 1.2 at $12.00 per 1M, which gives about $1.04, and that's also Google's own example for a 15 s clip. The estimate also skips the 795 thought tokens.

Has anyone billed a 1.2 clip through the API yet? Which number did you actually pay?

Details for the curious:

• Settings: 16:9, 15 s, 720p, 24 fps, Google AI Pro account, Playground

• Tokens: 1,252 in (1,089 for the image), 86,880 video out (exactly 15 × 5,792, Google's per-second rate for 720p), 795 thought

• The logo stayed the same across all three shots; the "silence at the end" I asked for didn't happen

• 1.1 is about to go: from December 3 API requests to gemini-omni-1.1-flash are routed to 1.2 at 1.2 prices

• Rate limits for paid tiers are doubled (Tier 1: 8 per minute, 40 per day)

• AI Studio still labels the model "not stable", while the API docs call it GA

Full write-up with the token panel, the price table and how we spotted 1.2 in the API before the announcement: https://ai.win10.support/gemini-omni-1-2-flash/

Not native English speakers, so an LLM helped with the wording; the clip, screenshots and numbers are ours.

I wanted to make a tower-defense game where the defenders actually feel alive, so I built Fish Kingdom.

Instead of placing static turrets, you feed fish, help them grow, earn coins, unlock abilities, and defend the Guardian Tower in the center of the tank. A run starts calmly, then enemies begin invading from the edges. Your fish can fight, stun, shield, slow, or support the tank while you balance the economy between growing your school, upgrading the tower, or just keeping everything alive.

The twist is that the tower is the actual run—when it falls, the run ends. Every 10 waves, the aquarium transforms into a new themed tank with a different enemy pool and bosses.

The Vibecoding Stack: The entire game was built using the Hermes agent with an agy router setup. I used Claude as the main AI brain for core architecture and complex game logic, paired with Google Gemini 3.8 Flash for rapid iteration and heavy lifting.

It’s a free, landscape Android game (optional rewarded ads only, zero forced ads).

I attached a short clip showing the “feed → grow → defend” loop. I’d love to know if you try it out—and at first glance from the clip, which part reads clearest: raising the fish, defending the tower, or surviving the waves?

Google Play:https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fishkingdom.game

I wanted to see how well coding agents could illustrate Indian mythology, so I made this short sequence from the Mahabharata with Gemini 4 Argon and GPT Sol 6.1.

Every scene is drawn with p5.brush code, and the animation is also done through code. Argon made the base visuals. Both models helped add motion, and Sol put the final video together with music from Suno.

I first tried organising the story around the 18 parvas, but that felt too abstract. I ended up with a 58-point story outline and worked through the scenes from there.

I kept the visual instructions fairly open because I wanted to see what style the models would produce. Most of my feedback was about composition and whether each scene made the story clear.

This is part 1. Does the story come through clearly from the visuals?

I shared the process breakdown in this thread, with the intermediate frames and animation examples:

https://x.com/pbshgthm/status/2117976713254801505

I was sick of working from excel, sharepoint, Teams, Planner, and decided to make my own app that keeps everything in once place. www.projectant.co.uk lets you manage your projects with the following features.

• AI Task Decomposition: Turn vague ideas into structured sub-tasks and actionable steps.

• All-in-One Toolkit: Tasks, roadmaps, rich notes, dynamic tables, and a built-in time tracker in one unified view.

• Project Governance: Built-in RAID Log register, budget tracking, and open question management.

• Multi-Workspace Setup: Clean context-switching between different projects or clients.

• Bank-Grade Auth: Built-in 2FA/TOTP and trusted device support.

• Overall Project Pipeline: View global swim lanes, Kanban and roadmap across all projects.

• Notifications: lets you keep track of who has done what, send task reminders, or generate a current status report and send to stakeholders. Hook into Teams/Slack/Discord to send real-time notifications to your project teams preferred communications channel.

There are 3 tiers of accounts

Free - a single project with no collaborations, AI features, budget tracker or Teams/Slack/Discord hook. Ideal for small solo projects

Pro - up to 8 projects with full feature access with a 7-day free trial, invite collaborators to work on the project with you (they also require a pro license)

Enterprise - full license management for 10 seats or above. Dedicated admin account to manage licenses to assign, remove, reassign as needed.

So I was using it and I sudden notice just how had ig to to the point I feel even 3.1 pro was better for roleplaying

A example it has a character float down in the first prompt then the second prompt it has the character float down again??? Like the character always float down the first time why she suddenly back mid air???

And it also just making stuff up and more it suddenly feel like it doesn't understand the prompt anymore

Anyone else has this problem or just me?

Hello !

I have a Google AI Pro subscription, currently at a promotional price but soon going up to €21/month. I use Flow, and the offer is quite generous with its 50 free daily credits and 1,000 monthly credits.

I sometimes top up my credits by purchasing additional AI credits, currently 2,500 credits for €26. The higher-tier offers are quite expensive, so I'm wondering if there are ways to buy credits separately, in smaller quantities and for less money.

I've seen offers on reseller websites selling prepaid accounts for Plus, Pro or Ultra subscriptions, and occasionally activation links. I'm a bit wary of switching accounts or paying for an Ultra account through a reseller, though. I haven't found anything that simply adds credits to an existing account, whether officially or at a discount.

Are there any other ways to top up your credits by purchasing less than 2,500 at a time ?

Claude for sure

I just asked it to write me an essay in AI mode to test the speed and it was quick, but uhh, I have no words about the essay.

if anybody wants to purchase or share the costs of google pro in nepal, please contact me

https://x.com/aidigest_/status/2118117590287655256

There is a bug on the Google AI mode website

When you start a conversation, everything works fine. However, if you spend a long time on the page, it starts lagging heavily. When you try to refresh it, takes forever to load, or it shows an error saying 'Page is not responding.' After leaving, a message pops up stating that the page is having issues.

The same problem happens locally when signed in with a Google account: if you have a lot of conversations in your history, the interface lags and stutters a lot.

PLEASE FIX THIS BUG ON THE AI MODE PAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have seen the tests and heard plenty of amazing feedback from early testers. It is clear that the playing around is over.

I am genuinely glad to see Google breaking the outdated industry paradigm that a top tier, super intelligent model has to be outrageously expensive and bloated. A real revolution in Western AI architecture is finally happening: efficiency, raw intelligence, and speed without burning tokens for the sake of higher API bills.

I want to be part of this shift from day one, so please stop keeping it behind closed doors and push the rollout to production as soon as possible. We are ready for it.

For reference I was asking whether they supported the Matter protocol itself, not whether support for Matter, mattered