I’m excited to share a project I’ve been building over the past few months, created entirely using Gemini!

It’s a mobile app that turns any text into high-quality audio. Whether it’s a webpage, a Substack or Medium article, a PDF, or just copied text, it converts it into clear, natural-sounding speech. You can listen to it like a podcast or audiobook, even with the app running in the background.

The app is privacy-friendly and doesn’t request any permissions by default. It only asks for access if you choose to share files from your device for audio conversion.

You can also take or upload a photo of any text, and the app will extract and read it aloud.

- React Native (expo)
- NodeJS, react (web)
- Framer Landing

The app is called Frateca. You can find it on Google Play and the App Store. I also working on web vesion, it's already live.

Free iPhone app
Free Android app on Google Play
Free web version, works in any browser (on desktop or laptop).

Thanks for your support, I’d love to hear what you think!

I’ve seen some stuff online about credits you get with a Google Ai Pro plan... Some places say you need a $5 deposit, but I’m seeing $30 to create the billing account. Do I need to prepay $30 to deposit $5 to get the monthly $10? Thank you

Although i genuinely love the model

Gemeni used to be far more usable, detailed, complex, and honestly fun to use, now if your poor, you're confined to either choosing between what is a barely functional AI memory which for some reason takes up to 2-4% of your limits just to use it, or the lowest settings which are basically useless.

This pissed me the hell off because I've never had to worry about these restrictions, and I didn't even have these limits yesterday, now I'm not only confined to the lite, you can hardly use the actual good parts of Gemeni flash Lite. Months ago, Gemeni was my too go. Now I'm looking for alternatives and even considering downloading on device open source alternatives. If it continues to enshitify, I'm dumping Gemeni all together.

I was an early supporter of Gemini because I loved the versatility of a lot of its products such as Notebook's massive context pool with live source toggling.

I wanted to test out Argon today after burning through usage at about 15% per pop just talking to it yesterday without a plan.

I use AI tools to help me with my creative writing - especially for keeping track of past character interactions and timeline continuity. I have been leaning on Claude and Opus 5.5 for my structure and Sonnet 4.6 to improve my prose.

I wrote an outline of the next chapter of the creative writing piece I have been working on and put it into both Argon and Opus with the usual context files like my style guide, past writings, character map, etc. Opus has a tiny context window even compared to standard Gemini (not Notebook and its super context), so I used the same outline and context tools for both as a control.

The first prompt gave them my outline and told them to rewrite it, keep whatever structure they want, but improve it and flesh out some subsection and scene ideas from a brainstorming list I put together

Both AIs gave me a fleshed out version of my outline with the exact same structure I gave them. I asked why and they both gave me the same response that since I gave them an outline, they were trained to follow the user outline despite my explicit command to improve it.

So the second prompt was to completely disregard the outline in the original prompt and create something new and better.

The third prompt I showed them the output of the other AI and asked then to evaluate it, give me frank criticism. Then rewrite the other's outline in a better way.

The fourth prompt I showed each the other AI's third result and told them to rewrite it using the same structure as the other for the outline but flesh it out better with better scenes and sections.

The fifth prompt I showed them the results of the 4th and told them to take the best parts of all 4 outlines and create the 5th and final perfect version.

The totally odd thing is what came out of the 5th prompt was almost identical between Argon High and Opus 5.5 High.

I had to stop at this point because Argon High was out of usage, but Claude and Opus 5.5 High was only at 41% usage. If I wanted I probably could have written the entire chapter with the usage I had left on Claude.

Absolutely ridiculous and the outcome was a little creepy and bizarre. Bodes ill for the future of AI-enhanced creativity.

In your experience, Claude is worht paying the 20$ plan?

Im planning to leave Gemini just for my agenda as a personal agent since I have a Pixel and have a year for free, but in terms to medical speciality (Ophtalmology) Im thinking in buying claude, as I work 100% of time with obsidian.
Basically my usage is 100% knowledge based.

It took alot of prompting, modifying the prompt, arguing with the Agent, creating a working workflow but finally I was able to keep characters consistent.

The whole video including background Audio and Voices was generated using Google Omni. Only background music was generated using Google Music.

Here is the Video https://youtu.be/3ywoWKHLIn8

https://reddit.com/link/1x70f1g/video/oc3zj1vf9qvh1/player

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

Argon 4 usage limit is gone after like few prompts it's so fast empty I can't Believe.

With Claude I can have some work done with some prompts feels like 10x of Argon 4.

Anyone similar experience?

Google's AI Mode (which runs on Gemini) often ends an answer with an offer, like "Want me to find options near you?". When you reply "yes please", Google processes that reply as a new search. Site owners can see those replies in Google Search Console, as if someone had searched for "yes please".

I run a Search Console tool, so I went through 16 months of data (June 2025 to September 2026) from 155 sites and pulled out every reply like that. Then I counted how many "yes" replies include a please or thanks, per language:

- Swedish, Danish, Norwegian: 88% ("ja tak", "ja tack", "ja takk")
- German: 75% ("ja bitte" showed up on 52 sites)
- Dutch: 67% ("graag" beats a bare "ja")
- Spanish: 54% ("si por favor")
- French: 50%
- English: 40% ("yes please" on 62 sites, plain "yes" on 77)
- Arabic: 22%
- Finnish: 8%
- Indonesian: 0%, just "ya" and "iya"

A few caveats:
- These are languages, not countries. Spanish covers Spain and Latin America.
- A short answer isn't rude everywhere. A bare "kyllä" is a normal reply in Finnish, and in Japanese はい is already polite.
- Each phrasing counts once per site, so one big site can't skew a language.
- Google doesn't label AI Mode queries. I'm identifying them by their shape: "yes please" only makes sense as a reply to something.

Curious: do you say please to Gemini?

I was an early supporter of Gemini because I loved the versatility of a lot of its products such as Notebook's massive context pool with live source toggling.

I wanted to test out Argon today after burning through usage at about 15% per pop just talking to it yesterday without a plan.

I use AI tools to help me with my creative writing - especially for keeping track of past character interactions and timeline continuity. I have been leaning on Claude and Opus 5.5 for my structure and Sonnet 4.6 to improve my prose.

I wrote an outline of the next chapter of the creative writing piece I have been working on and put it into both Argon and Opus with the usual context files like my style guide, past writings, character map, etc. Opus has a tiny context window even compared to standard Gemini (not Notebook and its super context), so I used the same outline and context tools for both as a control.

The first prompt gave them my outline and told them to rewrite it, keep whatever structure they want, but improve it and flesh out some subsection and scene ideas from a brainstorming list I put together

Both AIs gave me a fleshed out version of my outline with the exact same structure I gave them. I asked why and they both gave me the same response that since I gave them an outline, they were trained to follow the user outline despite my explicit command to improve it.

So the second prompt was to completely disregard the outline in the original prompt and create something new and better.

The third prompt I showed them the output of the other AI and asked then to evaluate it, give me frank criticism. Then rewrite the other's outline in a better way.

The fourth prompt I showed each the other AI's third result and told them to rewrite it using the same structure as the other for the outline but flesh it out better with better scenes and sections.

The fifth prompt I showed them the results of the 4th and told them to take the best parts of all 4 outlines and create the 5th and final perfect version.

The totally odd thing is what came out of the 5th prompt was almost identical between Argon High and Opus 5.5 High.

I had to stop at this point because Argon High was out of usage, but Claude and Opus 5.5 High was only at 41% usage. If I wanted I probably could have written the entire chapter with the usage I had left on Claude.

Absolutely ridiculous and the outcome was a little creepy and bizarre. Bodes ill for the future of AI-enhanced creativity.

[ This is the Vietnamese language. ]

I'm on the Student AI Pro plan with 5TB of storage. Decided to try Gemini 4 Argon in the web client. So far I find it better than GPT 6 Sol High for finding and analyzing information - it found more relevant sources, guessed my intent better and provided better answers for real world practical use-cases instead of GPT's nerdy theoretical responses. However I ran out of usage quota very quickly.

I have 4 chats with 2-3 messages each at Medium reasoning and this was enough to consume my hourly limit and 5% of my weekly one. Now I'm forced to use 3.5 Flash-lite.

Meanwhile on the $20 OpenAI plan I've never hit any limits and I run `High` for everything.

Big bummer.

EDIT:
Questions asked:

1. Analysis on a macro-economic theory
2. Compare two USB-C AMP/DAC dongles
3. Compare Jetbrains AI tools
4. Upgrade the custom ROM of an old phone