Connect with us

Technology

I re-created Google’s cute Gemini ad with my own kid’s stuffie, and I wish I hadn’t

Published

on

I re-created Google’s cute Gemini ad with my own kid’s stuffie, and I wish I hadn’t

When your kid starts showing a preference for one of their stuffed animals, you’re supposed to buy a backup in case it goes missing.

I’ve heard this advice again and again, but never got around to buying a second plush deer once “Buddy” became my son’s obvious favorite. Neither, apparently, did the parents in Google’s newest ad for Gemini.

It’s the fictional but relatable story of two parents discovering their child’s favorite stuffed toy, a lamb named Mr. Fuzzy, was left behind on an airplane. They use Gemini to track down a replacement, but the new toy is on backorder. In the meantime, they stall by using Gemini to create images and videos showing Mr. Fuzzy on a worldwide solo adventure — wearing a beret in front of the Eiffel tower, running from a bull in Pamplona, that kind of thing — plus a clip where he explains to “Emma” that he can’t wait to rejoin her in five to eight business days. Adorable, or kinda weird, depending on how you look at it! But can Gemini actually do all of that? Only one way to find out.

I fed Gemini three pictures of Buddy, our real life Mr. Fuzzy, from different angles, and gave it the same prompt that’s in the ad: “find this stuffed animal to buy ASAP.” It returned a couple of likely candidates. But when I expanded its response to show its thinking I found the full eighteen hundred word essay detailing the twists and turns of its search as it considered and reconsidered whether Buddy is a dog, a bunny, or something else. It is bananas, including real phrases like “I am considering the puppy hypothesis,” “The tag is a loop on the butt,” and “I’m now back in the rabbit hole!” By the end, Gemini kind of threw its hands up and suggested that the toy might be from Target and was likely discontinued, and that I should check eBay.

‘I am considering the puppy hypothesis’

Advertisement

In fairness, Buddy is a little bit hard to read. His features lean generic cute woodland creature, his care tag has long since been discarded, and we’re not even 100 percent sure who gave him to us. He is, however, definitely made by Mary Meyer, per the loop on his butt. He does seem to be from the “Putty” collection, which is a path Gemini went down a couple of times, and is probably a fawn that was discontinued sometime around 2021. That’s the conclusion I came to on my own, after about 20 minutes of Googling and no help from AI. The AI blurb when I do a reverse image search on one of my photos confidently declares him to be a puppy.

Gemini did a better job with the second half of the assignment, but it wasn’t quite as easy as the ad makes it look. I started with a different photo of Buddy — one where he’s actually on a plane in my son’s arms — and gave it the next prompt: “make a photo of the deer on his next flight.” The result is pretty good, but his lower half is obscured in the source image so the feet aren’t quite right. Close enough, though.

The ad doesn’t show the full prompt for the next two photos, so I went with: “Now make a photo of the same deer in front of the Grand Canyon.” And it did just that — with the airplane seatbelt and headphones, too. I was more specific with my next prompt, added a camera in his hands, and got something more convincing.

Looks plausible enough.
Image: Gemini / The Verge

Safety first, Buddy.
Image: Gemini / The Verge

I can see how Gemini misinterpreted my prompt. I was trying to keep it simple, and requested a photo of the same deer “at a family reunion.” I did not specify his family reunion. So that’s how he ended up crashing the Johnson family reunion — a gathering of humans. I can only assume that Gemini took my last name as a starting point here because it sure wasn’t in my prompt, and when I requested that Gemini created a new family reunion scene of his family, it just swapped the people for stuffed deer. There are even little placards on the table that say “deer reunion.” Reader, I screamed.

Advertisement
<em>I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this family in a pharmaceutical commercial before.</em>” data-chromatic=”ignore” loading=”lazy” decoding=”async” data-nimg=”fill” class=”_1etxtj17 _1etxtj15 _1etxtj14 x271pn0″ style=”position:absolute;height:100%;width:100%;left:0;top:0;right:0;bottom:0;color:transparent;background-size:cover;background-position:50% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-image:url(“data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns=’http://www.w3.org/2000/svg’ %3E%3Cfilter id=’b’ color-interpolation-filters=’sRGB’%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation=’20’/%3E%3CfeColorMatrix values=’1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 -1′ result=’s’/%3E%3CfeFlood x=’0′ y=’0′ width=’100%25′ height=’100%25’/%3E%3CfeComposite operator=’out’ in=’s’/%3E%3CfeComposite in2=’SourceGraphic’/%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation=’20’/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3Cimage width=’100%25′ height=’100%25′ x=’0′ y=’0′ preserveAspectRatio=’none’ style=’filter: url(%23b);’ href=’’/%3E%3C/svg%3E”)” sizes=”(max-width: 1023px) 100vw, 744px” srcset=”https://i3.wp.com/platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/12/Gemini_Generated_Image_7sgdp77sgdp77sgd.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=2400+2400w&ssl=1″ fifu-data-src=”https://platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/12/Gemini_Generated_Image_7sgdp77sgdp77sgd.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=2400″/></div>
<div class=<em>Oh deer.</em>” data-chromatic=”ignore” loading=”lazy” decoding=”async” data-nimg=”fill” class=”_1etxtj17 _1etxtj16 _1etxtj14 x271pn0″ style=”position:absolute;height:100%;width:100%;left:0;top:0;right:0;bottom:0;color:transparent;background-size:cover;background-position:50% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-image:url(“data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns=’http://www.w3.org/2000/svg’ %3E%3Cfilter id=’b’ color-interpolation-filters=’sRGB’%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation=’20’/%3E%3CfeColorMatrix values=’1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100 -1′ result=’s’/%3E%3CfeFlood x=’0′ y=’0′ width=’100%25′ height=’100%25’/%3E%3CfeComposite operator=’out’ in=’s’/%3E%3CfeComposite in2=’SourceGraphic’/%3E%3CfeGaussianBlur stdDeviation=’20’/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3Cimage width=’100%25′ height=’100%25′ x=’0′ y=’0′ preserveAspectRatio=’none’ style=’filter: url(%23b);’ href=’’/%3E%3C/svg%3E”)” sizes=”(max-width: 1023px) 100vw, 744px” srcset=”https://i1.wp.com/platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/12/Gemini_Generated_Image_lu7frflu7frflu7f.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=2400+2400w&ssl=1″ fifu-data-src=”https://platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/12/Gemini_Generated_Image_lu7frflu7frflu7f.png?quality=90&strip=all&w=2400″/></div>
<p><button class=Previous

1/2

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen this family in a pharmaceutical commercial before.
Image: Gemini / The Verge

For the last portion of the ad, the couple use Gemini to create cute little videos of Mr. Fuzzy getting increasingly adventurous: snowboarding, white water rafting, skydiving, before finally appearing in a spacesuit on the moon addressing “Emma” directly. The commercial whips through all these clips quickly, which feels like a little sleight of hand given that Gemini takes at least a couple of minutes to create a video. And even on my Gemini Pro account, I’m limited to three generated videos per day. It would take a few days to get all of those clips right.

Gemini wouldn’t make a video based on any image of my kid holding the stuffed deer, probably thanks to some welcome guardrails preventing it from generating deepfakes of babies. I started with the only photo I had on hand of Buddy on his own: hanging upside down, air-drying after a trip through the washer. And that’s how he appears in the first clip it generated from this prompt: Temu Buddy hanging upside down in space before dropping into place, morphing into a right-side-up astronaut, and delivering the dialogue I requested.

A second prompt with a clear photo of Buddy right-side-up seemed to mash up elements of the previous video with the new one, so I started a brand new chat to see if I could get it working from scratch. Honestly? Nailed it. Aside from the antlers, which Gemini keeps sneaking in. But this clip also brought one nagging question to the forefront: should you do any of this when your kid loses a beloved toy?

I gave Buddy the same dialogue as in the commercial, using my son’s name rather than Emma. Hearing that same manufactured voice say my kid’s name out loud set alarm bells off in my head. An AI generated Buddy in front of the Eiffel Tower? Sorta weird, sorta cute. AI Buddy addressing my son by name? Nope, absolutely not, no thank you.

How much, and when, to lie to your kids is a philosophical debate you have with yourself over and over as a parent. Do you swap in the identical stuffie you had in a closet when the original goes missing and pretend it’s all the same? Do you tell them the truth and take it as an opportunity to learn about grief? Do you just need to buy yourself a little extra time before you have that conversation, and enlist AI to help you make a believable case? I wouldn’t blame any parent choosing any of the above. But personally, I draw the line at an AI character talking directly to my kid. I never showed him these AI-generated versions of Buddy, and I plan to keep it that way.

Advertisement

Nope, absolutely not, no thank you.

But back to the less morally complex question: can Gemini actually do all of the things that it does in the commercial? More or less. But there’s an awful lot of careful prompting and re-prompting you’d have to do to get those results. It’s telling that throughout most of the ad you don’t see the full prompt that’s supposedly generating the results on screen. A lot depends on your source material, too. Gemini wouldn’t produce any kind of video based on an image in which my kid was holding Buddy — for good reason! But this does mean that if you don’t have the right kind of photo on hand, you’re going to have a very hard time generating believable videos of Mr. Sniffles or whoever hitting the ski slopes.

Like many other elder millennials, I think about Calvin and Hobbes a lot. Bill Watterson famously refused to commercialize his characters, because he wanted to keep them alive in our imaginations rather than on a screen. He insisted that having an actor give Hobbes a voice would change the relationship between the reader and the character, and I think he’s right. The bond between a kid and a stuffed animal is real and kinda magical; whoever Buddy is in my kid’s imagination, I don’t want AI overwriting that.

The great cruelty of it all is knowing that there’s an expiration date on that relationship. When I became a parent, I wasn’t at all prepared for the way my toddler nuzzling his stuffed deer would crack my heart right open. It’s so pure and sweet, but it always makes me a little sad at the same time, knowing that the days where he looks for comfort from a stuffed animal like Buddy are numbered. He’s going to outgrow it all, and I’m not prepared for that reality. Maybe as much as we’re trying to save our kids some heartbreak over their lost companion, we’re really trying to delay ours, too.

All images and videos in this story were generated by Google Gemini.

Advertisement
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

Advertisement

Technology

The White House has an app now, and Trump wants you to report people to ICE on it

Published

on

The White House has an app now, and Trump wants you to report people to ICE on it

A new official White House app on Android and iOS takes the content from the White House website and copies it into app format. A tweet announcing the app on Friday morning appeared alongside a video joking about missile launches that also appears to feature an iPhone, rather than the elusive Trump Phone. There’s no word about exclusive features or tie-ins with the phone or Trump Mobile services.

A handful of tabs in the app mostly replicate pages that exist on the Trump Administration’s version of the White House website, including news, livestreams, social feeds, and a gallery. A prominent “Get in Touch” button on the social feeds tab includes an option for users to submit a tip to ICE, which takes them to a tip form on the ICE website. It also includes options for texting the president, contacting the White House, or signing up for a newsletter — we could suggest some better ones.

Continue Reading

Technology

Fox News AI Newsletter: Family turns down $26M from AI giant to keep farmland

Published

on

Fox News AI Newsletter: Family turns down M from AI giant to keep farmland

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Welcome to Fox News’ Artificial Intelligence newsletter with the latest AI technology advancements.

IN TODAY’S NEWSLETTER:

– Kentucky family turns down $26M from AI giant to keep farmland that ‘fed a nation’

– Trump names David Sacks co-chair of tech advisory council, expanding AI, crypto role 

– Hollywood union praises Trump’s AI policy as ‘protections for human creativity’

Advertisement

MOOVE ALONG: A Kentucky family reportedly rejected a massive $26 million offer from a major artificial intelligence company. The family chose instead to preserve their historic farmland, citing its legacy of helping feed the nation over corporate tech expansion.

A train sits in front of houses on the banks of the Ohio River in Maysville, Kentucky, Sept. 13, 2017. (REUTERS/Brian Snyder)

GROWING INFLUENCE: President Donald Trump has appointed David Sacks as the co-chair of his technology advisory council. This strategic move signals an expanded focus on shaping both artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency policies under the current administration’s economic and political agenda.

‘STRONGLY SUPPORT’: A major Hollywood union is offering praise for President Trump’s approach to artificial intelligence policy. The union specifically highlighted the administration’s efforts to implement protections for human creativity in the face of rapidly evolving generative AI tools in the entertainment industry.

First lady Melania Trump arrives, accompanied by a robot, to attend the “Fostering the Future Together Global Coalition Summit,” with other first spouses, at the White House, Wednesday, March 25, 2026, in Washington. (Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo)

Advertisement

FUTURE FORWARD: First lady Melania Trump welcomed a humanoid robot during a historic artificial intelligence summit hosted at the White House. The event underscores the administration’s active engagement with rapidly advancing emerging technologies.

WASTE WATCH: Vice President JD Vance’s anti-fraud task force intensifies its efforts to identify and root out fraudulent activities nationwide. The ramped-up initiative follows a major enforcement action that resulted in the suspension of 70 providers in Los Angeles.

TECH SHOWDOWN: House Speaker Mike Johnson outlined two specific conditions that he argues must be met for the United States to successfully win the highly competitive global artificial intelligence race.

SIDELINING PROGRESS: Sen. John Fetterman sharply criticized a proposed moratorium on the construction of AI data centers. Fetterman argues that pausing infrastructure development would place the United States at a severe disadvantage, characterizing the proposal as a “China first” policy.

Nevada Big Blind center. (Zanskar)

Advertisement

EARTH’S EDGE: Fox News’ Bret Baier explores the intersection of political energy strategy and next-generation technology, reporting on how artificial intelligence is playing a crucial role in unlocking new potential for geothermal energy development across the country.

POWER PLAY: Palantir CTO Shyam Sankar addresses what he calls America’s “undeclared emergency.” The sweeping cultural and geopolitical conversation covers the threat posed by Iran, the development of deadly new U.S. weapons systems and strategic maneuvers required to avoid World War III.

CAUTION ADVISED: Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak expressed skepticism about the current state of artificial intelligence. Weighing in on the tech industry’s latest obsession, Wozniak stated plainly that he is not a fan of the technology’s current trajectory.

MONEY MATTERS: BlackRock CEO Larry Fink warned about the financial disparities potentially exacerbated by technological advancements. Fink emphasized that expanding market participation is absolutely necessary to address the growing wealth gap amid the current artificial intelligence boom.

FOLLOW FOX NEWS ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Facebook
Instagram
YouTube
X
LinkedIn

Advertisement

SIGN UP FOR OUR OTHER NEWSLETTERS

Fox News First
Fox News Opinion
Fox News Lifestyle
Fox News Health

DOWNLOAD OUR APPS

Fox News
Fox Business
Fox Weather
Fox Sports
Tubi

WATCH FOX NEWS ONLINE

Fox News Go

STREAM FOX NATION

Fox Nation

Stay up to date on the latest AI technology advancements, and learn about the challenges and opportunities AI presents now and for the future with Fox News here.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Technology

Judge sides with Anthropic to temporarily block the Pentagon’s ban

Published

on

Judge sides with Anthropic to temporarily block the Pentagon’s ban

After Anthropic’s weeks-long standoff with the Pentagon, the company won one milestone: A judge granted Anthropic a preliminary injunction in its lawsuit, which sought to reverse its government blacklisting while the judicial process plays out.

“The Department of War’s records show that it designated Anthropic as a supply chain risk because of its ‘hostile manner through the press,’” Judge Rita F. Lin, a district judge in the northern district of California, wrote in the order, which will go into effect in seven days. “Punishing Anthropic for bringing public scrutiny to the government’s contracting position is classic illegal First Amendment retaliation.”

A final verdict could be weeks or months out.

Anthropic spokesperson Danielle Cohen said in a Thursday statement, “We’re grateful to the court for moving swiftly, and pleased they agree Anthropic is likely to succeed on the merits. While this case was necessary to protect Anthropic, our customers, and our partners, our focus remains on working productively with the government to ensure all Americans benefit from safe, reliable AI.”

“I do think this case touches on an important debate,” Judge Lin said during the Tuesday hearing. “On the one hand, Anthropic is saying that its AI product, Claude, is not safe to use for autonomous lethal weapons and domestic mass surveillance. Anthropic’s position is that if the government wants to use its technology, the government has to agree not to use it for those purposes. On the other hand the Department of War is saying that military commanders have to decide what is safe for its AI to do.”

Advertisement

On Tuesday, Judge Lin went on to say, “It’s not my role to decide who’s right in that debate… The Department of War decides what AI product it wants to use and buy. And everyone, including Anthropic, agrees that the Department of War is free to stop using Claude and look for a more permissive AI vendor.” She added, “I see the question in this case as being … whether the government violated the law when it went beyond that.”

It all started with a memo sent by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Jan. 9, calling for “any lawful use” language to be written into any AI services procurement contract within 180 days, which would include existing contracts with companies like Anthropic, OpenAI, xAI, and Google. Anthropic’s negotiations with the Pentagon stretched on for weeks, hinging on two “red lines” that the company did not want the military to use its AI for: domestic mass surveillance and lethal autonomous weapons (or AI systems with the power to kill targets with no human involvement in the decision-making process). The rollercoaster series of events that followed has included a barrage of social media insults, a formal “supply chain risk” designation with the potential to significantly handicap Anthropic’s business, competing AI companies swooping in to make deals, and an ensuing lawsuit.

With its lawsuit, Anthropic argues that it was punished for speech protected under the First Amendment, and it’s seeking to reverse the supply chain risk designation.

It’s rare, and potentially even unheard of until now, for a US company to be named a supply chain risk, a designation typically reserved for non-US companies potentially linked to foreign adversaries. Anthropic’s designation as such raised eyebrows nationwide and caused bipartisan controversy due to concerns that disagreeing with a presidential administration could potentially lead to outsized retribution for a business in any sector.

Anthropic’s own business has been significantly affected by the designation, according to its court filings, which say that it has “received outreach from numerous outside partners … expressing confusion about what was required of them and concern about their ability to continue to work with Anthropic” and that “dozens of companies have contacted Anthropic” for guidance or information about their rights to terminate usage. Depending on the level to which the government prohibits its contractors’ work with Anthropic, the company alleged that revenue adding up to between hundreds of millions and multiple billions could be at risk.

Advertisement

During Tuesday’s hearing, both companies had a chance to respond to Judge Lin’s questions, which were released in a document the day prior and hinged on matters like whether Hegseth lacked authority to issue certain directives and why Anthropic was named a supply chain risk. The judge also asked, in her pre-released questions, about the circumstances under which a government contractor could face termination for using Anthropic’s technology in their work — for instance, “if a contractor for the Department uses Claude Code as a tool to write software for the Department’s national security systems, would that contractor face termination as a result?”

On Tuesday, the judge also seemed to admonish the Department of War for Hegseth’s X post that caused a lot of widespread confusion per Anthropic’s earlier court filings, stating that “effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic.”

“You’re standing here saying, ‘We said it but we didn’t really mean it,’” Judge Lin said during the hearing, later pressing on the question of why Hegseth wrote the above barring contractors from working with Anthropic instead of just simply designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk.

In a series of questions on Tuesday, Judge Lin asked whether the Department of War plans to terminate contractors on the basis of their work with Anthropic if it’s separate from their work with the department, and a representative for the Department of War responded, “That is my understanding.”

Judge Lin asked, “Let’s say I’m a military contractor. I don’t provide IT to the military. I provide toilet paper to the military. I’m not going to be terminated for using Anthropic — is that accurate?” The representative for the Department of War responded, “For non-DoW work, that is my understanding.” But when the judge asked whether a military contractor providing IT services to the Department of War, but not for national security systems, could be terminated for using Anthropic, the representative for the Department of War did not give a concrete answer.

Advertisement

During the hearing, Judge Lin cited one of the amicus briefs, which she said used the term “attempted corporate murder.” She said, “I don’t know if it’s ‘murder,’ but it looks like an attempt to cripple Anthropic.”

“We are continuing to be irreparably injured by this directive,” a lawyer for Anthropic said during the hearing, citing Hegseth’s nine-paragraph X post.

In a recent court filing, the Department of Defense alleged that Anthropic could ostensibly “attempt to disable its technology or preemptively alter the behavior of its model either before or during ongoing warfighting operations” in the event it felt the military was crossing its red lines — a theoretical situation that the Pentagon said it deemed an “unacceptable risk to national security.” The judge’s pre-released questions seem to challenge that statement, or at least request more information on it, stating, “What evidence in the record shows that Anthropic had ongoing access to or control over Claude after delivering it to the government, such that Anthropic could engage in such acts of sabotage or subversion?”

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

Continue Reading

Trending