Not your com­puter? Use a pri­vate brows­ing win­dow to sign in. Learn more about us­ing Guest mode

Nearly all UK dri­vers said they thought head­lights were too bright and that they have been daz­zled by on­com­ing ve­hi­cles, ac­cord­ing to a ma­jor study. The gov­ern­ment said last week that it will take a closer look at the de­sign of cars and head­lamps af­ter con­cerns about lights daz­zling dri­vers.A study com­mis­sioned by the Department for Transport (DfT) found 97% of peo­ple sur­veyed found they were reg­u­larly or some­times dis­tracted by on­com­ing ve­hi­cles and 96% thought most or some head­lights were too bright. Dr Shaun Helman, who led the re­search for Berkshire-based Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), said it pro­vides “compelling ev­i­dence” that lights’ glare is a “genuine is­sue for UK dri­vers”.

New mea­sures will be in­cluded in the gov­ern­men­t’s up­com­ing Road Safety Strategy, re­flect­ing what is be­com­ing an in­creas­ingly fraught is­sue for road users. TRL’s data sug­gests that LED and whiter head­lamps may be linked to glare and that dri­vers might find their white­ness harder to cope with.Of those sur­veyed, 33% said they had ei­ther stopped dri­ving or are dri­ving less at night be­cause of lights, while an­other 22% said they would like to drive less at night but have no choice. A to­tal of 1,850 dri­vers, matched to the age and gen­der split of the coun­try’s li­cence hold­ing pop­u­la­tion, were sur­veyed for their views.

TRL said LED lights used in ve­hi­cles are brighter, more con­cen­trated and emit more blue light, which hu­man eyes strug­gle with more at night. The RAC’s se­nior pol­icy of­fi­cer Rod Dennis said: “Having cam­paigned hard for this study, we wel­come its find­ings which in­de­pen­dently con­firm what dri­vers have been telling us — that rather than be­ing an imag­ined phe­nom­e­non, some bright head­lights do cause a glare prob­lem.“While dri­vers clearly ben­e­fit from high-per­form­ing head­lights, it’s im­por­tant this does­n’t lead to oth­ers suf­fer­ing the ef­fects of daz­zle, so a bal­ance needs to be struck,” he added.Mr Dennis said that it is “vital” TRL’s re­port is “reviewed care­fully to put us on a path to­wards changes that ul­ti­mately ben­e­fit all road users.“Denise Voon, a clin­i­cal ad­vi­sor at The College of Optometrists, said the DfT should “take im­me­di­ate, ac­tion­able steps to sup­port dri­vers and com­mis­sion more de­tailed re­search, specif­i­cally into how head­light reg­u­la­tions need to change”.

After nearly 10 years, I am step­ping down as the CEO of Mastodon and trans­fer­ring my own­er­ship of the trade­mark and other as­sets to the Mastodon non-profit. Over the course of my time at Mastodon, I have cen­tered my­self less and less in our out­ward com­mu­ni­ca­tions, and to some de­gree, this is the cul­mi­na­tion of that trend. Mastodon is big­ger than me, and though the tech­nol­ogy we de­velop on is it­self de­cen­tral­ized—with heaps of al­ter­na­tive fe­di­verse pro­jects demon­strat­ing that par­tic­i­pa­tion in this ecosys­tem is pos­si­ble with­out our in­volve­ment—it ben­e­fits our com­mu­nity to en­sure that the pro­ject it­self which so many peo­ple have come to love and de­pend on re­mains true to its val­ues. There are too many ex­am­ples of founder egos sab­o­tag­ing thriv­ing com­mu­ni­ties, and while I’d like to think my­self an ex­cep­tion, I un­der­stand why peo­ple would pre­fer bet­ter guardrails.

But it would be un­couth for me to pre­tend that there is­n’t some self-in­ter­est in­volved. Being in charge of a so­cial me­dia pro­ject is, turns out, quite the stress­ful en­deav­our, and I don’t have the right per­son­al­ity for it. I think I need not elab­o­rate that the pas­sion so many feel for so­cial me­dia does not al­ways man­i­fest in healthy ways. You are to be com­pared with tech bil­lion­aires, with their im­mense wealth and lay­ered sup­port sys­tems, but with none of the money or re­sources. It man­i­fests in what peo­ple ex­pect of you, and how peo­ple talk about you. I re­mem­ber some­body jok­ingly sug­gest­ing that I chal­lenge Elon Musk to a fight (this was dur­ing his and Mark Zuckerberg’s mar­tial arts feud), and qui­etly think­ing to my­self, I am lit­er­ally not paid enough for that. I re­mem­ber also, some Spanish news­pa­per ar­ti­cle that for some rea­son, con­cluded that I don’t dress as fash­ion­ably as Jeff Bezos, based on the ex­tremely sparse num­ber of pic­tures of my­self I have shared on the web. Over an en­tire decade, these tiny things chip away at you slowly. Some things chip faster. I steer clear of show­ing vul­ner­a­bil­ity on­line, but there was a par­tic­u­larly bad in­ter­ac­tion with a user last sum­mer that made me re­alise that I need to take a step back and find a health­ier re­la­tion­ship with the pro­ject, ul­ti­mately serv­ing as the im­pe­tus to be­gin this re­struc­tur­ing process.

As for what the legacy of my run will be, I find hard to an­swer. For one, I think it is not up for me to judge. On the other hand, it is as much about what did­n’t hap­pen as it is about what did. I’ve al­ways thought that one of the most im­por­tant re­spon­si­bil­i­ties I had was to say “no”. It is not a pop­u­lar thing to do, nor is it a fun thing to do, but be­ing pulled into too many dif­fer­ent di­rec­tions at once can spell dis­as­ter for any pro­ject. I’d like to think I avoided some trou­ble by be­ing care­ful. But I’m also aware that my aver­sion to pub­lic ap­pear­ances cost Mastodon some op­por­tu­ni­ties in pub­lic­ity. Ultimately, while I can­not take sole credit for it, I am nev­er­the­less most proud of how far we’ve made it over these last 10 years. From the most bare­bones pro­ject writ­ten out of my child­hood bed­room, to one of the last re­main­ing and thriv­ing pieces of the orig­i­nal, com­mu­nity-cen­tred in­ter­net.

I have so much pas­sion for Mastodon and the fe­di­verse. The fe­di­verse is an is­land within an in­creas­ingly dystopian cap­i­tal­ist hellscape. And from my per­spec­tive, Mastodon is our best shot at bring­ing this vi­sion of a bet­ter fu­ture to the masses. This is why I’m stick­ing around, al­beit in a more ad­vi­sory, and less pub­lic, role.

At the time of writ­ing 12:43 UTC on Tue 18 Nov, Cloudflare has taken many sites down. I’m try­ing to browse the web, but about half of the sites show an er­ror:

Most of these sites are not even that big. I ex­pect maybe a few thou­sand vis­i­tors per month.

This demon­strates again a sim­ple fact: if you put your site be­hind a cen­tral­ized ser­vice, then this ser­vice is a sin­gle point of fail­ure. Even large es­tab­lished com­pa­nies make mis­takes and can go down.

Most peo­ple use Cloudflare be­cause they have been scared into the idea that you need DDoS pro­tec­tion. Well, maybe you do, but prob­a­bly you don’t.

As they say in se­cu­rity, “no one will burn a zero day on you!”. For your small blog with one hun­dred vis­i­tors per month, it’s prob­a­bly the same: “no one will burn their DDoS ca­pa­bil­i­ties on you!”

I don’t know how else to say it. Many peo­ple keep talk­ing about the im­por­tance of a de­cen­tral­ized web, and then con­tinue putting their site be­hind Cloudflare.

If you re­ally want to be safe in case your server goes down, then setup a sec­ond ver­sion of your site at an­other lo­ca­tion and point to that server via the A and AAAA records, see “round-robin DNS”.

Maybe that’s the core of this mes­sage. Face your fears. Put your ser­vice on the in­ter­net. Maybe it goes down, but at least not by yet an­other Cloudflare out­age.

I be­lieve the Pebble com­mu­nity, Core Devices, Rebble and I all want the same thing. We love our Pebbles and want them to keep work­ing long into the fu­ture. We love the com­mu­nity that has sprung up around Pebble, and how it’s per­se­vered - next year will be the 14th an­niver­sary of the orig­i­nal Kickstarter cam­paign!

But I have to re­spond to claims made by Rebble posted on their blog yes­ter­day. I will link to their post so you can read their side of the story, and I’ve asked them to link back to this blog post from theirs.

Look - I’m the first per­son to call my­self out when I fail. I wrote a de­tailed blog post about Success and Failure at Pebble and of­ten write in de­tail about learn­ing from my mis­takes. But in this spe­cific case, you’ll find that I’ve done my ut­most to re­spect the Pebble legacy and com­mu­nity. Rebble is mis­lead­ing the com­mu­nity with false ac­cu­sa­tions.

For those just pass­ing through, here’s the TLDR:

Core Devices is a small com­pany I started in 2025 to re­launch Pebble and build new Pebble smart­watches. Rebble is a non-profit or­ga­ni­za­tion that has sup­ported the Pebble com­mu­nity since 2017. Rebble has done a ton of great work over the years and de­serves recog­ni­tion and sup­port for that.

Core Devices and Rebble ne­go­ti­ated an agree­ment where Core would pay $0.20/user/month to sup­port Rebble ser­vices. But the agree­ment broke down af­ter over the fol­low­ing dis­agree­ment.

Rebble be­lieves that they ‘100%’ own the data of the Pebble Appstore. They’re at­tempt­ing to cre­ate a walled gar­den around 13,000 apps and faces that in­di­vid­ual Pebble de­vel­op­ers cre­ated and up­loaded to the Pebble Appstore be­tween 2012 and 2016. Rebble later scraped this data in 2017.

I dis­agree. I’m work­ing hard to keep the Pebble ecosys­tem open source. I be­lieve the con­tents of the Pebble Appstore should be freely avail­able and not con­trolled by one or­ga­ni­za­tion.

Rebble posted a blog post yes­ter­day with a bunch of false ac­cu­sa­tions, and in this post I speak to each of them.

* Dec 2016 - Pebble shut down. Some IP was sold to Fitbit. I blogged about why I think we failed. Fitbit con­tin­ued to run the Pebble Appstore and web ser­vices for 1.5 years. I re­ally ap­pre­ci­ated that.Reb­ble or­ga­ni­za­tion grew out of the of­fi­cial Pebble Developers Discord.

* Rebble or­ga­ni­za­tion grew out of the of­fi­cial Pebble Developers Discord.

* July 2018, Fitbit shut down the Pebble app­store.Be­fore it shut down, Rebble (and oth­ers) scraped all 13,000 apps and meta­data from the Pebble Appstore. Rebble be­gan host­ing a copy of the app­store. They cre­ated a new Dev Portal where de­vel­op­ers could up­load new apps, roughly 500 have been up­loaded since July 2018.Rebble also re­verse en­gi­neered many Pebble web ser­vices (weather, time­line and voice tran­scrip­tion) and pro­vided them as a paid ser­vice for the Pebble com­mu­nity.

* Before it shut down, Rebble (and oth­ers) scraped all 13,000 apps and meta­data from the Pebble Appstore. Rebble be­gan host­ing a copy of the app­store. They cre­ated a new Dev Portal where de­vel­op­ers could up­load new apps, roughly 500 have been up­loaded since July 2018.

* Rebble also re­verse en­gi­neered many Pebble web ser­vices (weather, time­line and voice tran­scrip­tion) and pro­vided them as a paid ser­vice for the Pebble com­mu­nity.

* Jan 2025 - Google open sourced PebbleOS, breath­ing new life into the com­mu­nity.

* March 2025 - I an­nounced a new com­pany (Core Devices) and 2 new watches - store.rePeb­ble.com

* November 2025 - we fin­ished ship­ping out 5,000 Pebble 2 Duos. We’re work­ing hard on Pebble Time 2. We’re aim­ing to start ship­ping in January.

Accusation 1: ‘Rebble paid for the work that [Eric] took as a base for his com­mer­cial watch­es’

* I think they’re ac­cus­ing me of ‘stealing’ open source con­tri­bu­tions to PebbleOS that Rebble paid for. This is en­tirely false.

* We did not take any PebbleOS work Rebble paid for ‘as a base for [our] com­mer­cial watch­es’. To my best of my knowl­edge My best guess is that they are re­fer­ring to Rebble hav­ing paid CodeCoup, the com­pany be­hind , to fix some bugs that af­fected older non-Core Devices watches. Any Rebble-sponsored CodeCoup com­mits are not pre­sent in our repo. In fact, the op­po­site is true - we paid Codecoup $10,000 to fix mul­ti­ple BLE stack is­sues, some of them on the host side that ben­e­fit all de­vices, in­clud­ing old Pebbles. Update: I’m told Rebble did pay him, months later. My point is valid - when we shifted de­vel­op­ment to our repo, Rebble had not paid any­thing. More broadly, I re­ject the premise that us­ing open source soft­ware un­der the terms of the li­cense, re­gard­less of who funds de­vel­op­ment, is ‘stealing’.

* We started us­ing our own repo for PebbleOS de­vel­op­ment be­cause PRs on the Rebble repo re­views were tak­ing too long. We only had one firmware en­gi­neer at the time (now we have a whop­ping 2!) and he felt like he was be­ing slowed down too much. All of our con­tri­bu­tions to PebbleOS have been 100% open source.

* Overall, the feed­back that PebbleOS could ben­e­fit from open gov­er­nance is well taken. Long term, PebbleOS would be a good fit for open source or­ga­ni­za­tion with ex­pe­ri­ence in open gov­er­nance, like Apache or Linux Foundation. I wrote about this last week.

* With our small team and fairly quick de­vel­op­ment sched­ule, it’s true that we haven’t PRed our changes into Rebble’s repo. It’s tough to pri­or­i­tize this while we are busy fix­ing bugs and get­ting ready for Pebble Time 2.

Accusation 2: ‘Core took Rebble’s work’ on libpeb­blecom­mon to cre­ate libpeb­ble3

* The ma­jor­ity (>90%) of our new open sourcelibpeb­ble3 li­brary was writ­ten by Core Devices em­ploy­ees. The re­main­der comes from libpeb­blecom­mon, an­other open source li­brary writ­ten by two peo­ple.

* In April 2025, Core pur­chased the copy­right to the libpeb­blecom­mon code from the two main­tain­ers and in­cor­po­rated it into libpeb­ble3**, which is also open source**.

* All our con­tri­bu­tions to libpeb­ble3 are GPL-3.0 li­censed. Here’s the mo­ti­va­tion be­hind that our li­cens­ing strat­egy for this repo. We use the same CLA agree­ment as Matrix, QT and MySQL. Our CLA ex­plic­itly in­cludes a clause that re­quires to Core Devices to dis­trib­ute all con­tri­bu­tions un­der an OSI-compatible FOSS li­cense (e.g. GPLv3).

* Note that nei­ther Rebble libpeb­blecom­mon main­tainer signed the Rebble blog post.

Side note re­gard­ing Cobble, I don’t think Rebble even knows this but in 2024, I per­son­ally spent over $30,000 to sup­port its de­vel­op­ment, way be­fore PebbleOS was open source. It was my own way to sup­port the com­mu­nity.

Accusation 3: ‘Core promised that they would let Rebble main­tain and own the de­vel­oper site’

* Nothing of the sort was agreed upon. See the full writ­ten agree­ment that Core Devices has with Rebble to­wards the bot­tom. Rebble agreed that Core would host the de­vel­oper site.

* I have been main­tain­ing and up­dat­ing the de­vel­oper site per­son­ally - all open source. Having two sources of truth would be con­fus­ing for the com­mu­nity.

Accusation 4: ‘[Eric] scraped our app store, in vi­o­la­tion of the agree­ment that we reached with him pre­vi­ous­ly’

Note: ‘scraping’ usu­ally means to au­to­mated ex­trac­tion of data from a web­site.

* Here’s what hap­pened. I wanted to high­light some of my favourite watch­faces on the Pebble Appstore. Last Monday Nov 10, af­ter I put my kids to sleep and be­tween long calls with fac­to­ries in Asia, I started build­ing a we­bapp to help me quickly go through Pebble Appstore and de­cide which were my top picks.

* Let me be crys­tal clear - my lit­tle we­bapp did not down­load apps or ‘scrape’ any­thing from Rebble. The we­bapp dis­played the name of each watch­face and screen­shots and let me click on my favs. I used it to man­u­ally look through 6000 watch­faces with my own eyes. I still have 7,000 to go. Post your server logs, they will match up iden­ti­cally to the app I (well…Claude) wrote (source code here)

* I in­te­grated these picks into the Pebble Appstore on Saturday and posted about it on Sunday.

All of four of these ac­cu­sa­tions could have been clar­i­fied sim­ply by ask­ing me. Instead, Rebble de­cided to post them on their blog and threaten a law­suit.

How did we get here?

Why are there du­el­ing blog posts in the Pebbleverse?

I think most of the peo­ple are be­hind Rebble are great and the com­mu­nity over­all is awe­some. I know they truly mean well, but there are many as­pects of the org that are se­verely trou­bling. I am very close with one of the Rebble board mem­bers, who I con­sider a per­sonal friend. Over the years, I learned a lot about the or­ga­ni­za­tion and helped coach him through some ma­jor dis­putes be­tween board mem­bers.

I ex­changed lit­er­ally thou­sands of mes­sages with my friend on this topic over the span of 3 years. I re­frained from get­ting too in­volved, de­spite be­ing asked sev­eral times to join Rebble as a board mem­ber or lead the or­ga­ni­za­tion. I de­murred - I saw how painful it was for him and I had no in­ter­est in be­ing part of that.

PebbleOS is now open source! Yay. This is thanks to the work of many Googlers, ex-Peb­blers and oth­ers - I called out (hopefully) all of them in my blog post in March. I re­ally wanted Rebble to be a part of the Pebble re­vival go­ing for­ward. I hired 3 peo­ple from Rebble to join Core Devices. I reg­u­larly brought up Rebble’s ef­forts over the years.

I en­gaged with Rebble folks in dis­cus­sions in the spring on how we could for­mally work to­gether, and then made some con­crete pro­pos­als in the sum­mer. One dif­fi­culty was that Core Devices is a busi­ness with cus­tomers and sched­ules. This did­n’t al­ways sync up with the time­frames of a non-profit. Things be­came very drawn out. It was very hard to pin peo­ple down, even on sim­ple stuff like what the goals of Rebble as an or­ga­ni­za­tion were.

Regardless, I con­tin­ued push­ing to make Rebble a key part of the Pebble re­launch.

By August, we fi­nally got close to an agree­ment.

On September 30 2025, we agreed to the fol­low­ing doc­u­ment and pub­lished re­spec­tive blog posts (ours, theres). Core Devices would pay Rebble $0.20/user/month. I con­sid­ered it a do­na­tion to a group that has done so much to sup­port the com­mu­nity. But I pur­posely pushed for open­ness - no sin­gle group (Core Devices or Rebble) should be in con­trol.

Notice the fi­nal bul­let in the App store sec­tion:

All bi­nary/​meta­data (including his­tor­i­cal apps) will be pub­lished as archive file (no scrap­ing Rebble ser­vices)

Looking back, we should have had more clear word­ing in this agree­ment. But this was af­ter months of chat dis­cus­sions and hours of Zoom calls. I hon­estly thought that we had reached an agree­ment to make the archive open, like in this mes­sage I re­ceived from a Rebble board mem­ber.

By the end of October, Rebble has changed their mind about pro­vid­ing an archive file.

Not with­stand­ing their false ac­cu­sa­tions of theft, the crux of our dis­agree­ment is the archive of 13,000 Pebble apps and watch­faces that were up­loaded to the Pebble Appstore in July 2018 be­fore it was shut down.

* I be­lieve that these apps and watch­faces should be archived pub­licly and freely ac­ces­si­ble by any­one. They should not held be­hind a walled gar­den by one or­ga­ni­za­tion. I re­peat­edly ad­vo­cated for host­ing this data on a neu­tral 3rd party like Archive.org.

* Rebble be­lieves ‘the data be­hind the Pebble App Store is 100% Rebble’ (this is a di­rect quote from their blog post). They re­peat­edly re­fer to all watch­faces and watchapps as ‘our data’.

This is just plainly false. The apps and watch­faces were orig­i­nally up­loaded by in­di­vid­ual de­vel­op­ers to an app­store run by a com­pany that no longer ex­ists. These folks cre­ated beau­ti­ful work and shared them freely with the Pebble com­mu­nity. I’ve spo­ken with nu­mer­ous Pebble app de­vel­op­ers about this. After the fall of Pebble Tech Corp, none of them en­vi­sioned one sin­gle or­ga­ni­za­tion claim­ing own­er­ship of their work and re­strict­ing ac­cess, or charg­ing money for ac­cess.

Let’s do the right thing - ho­n­our the orig­i­nal de­vel­op­ers and cre­ate a free pub­licly avail­able archive of their beau­ti­ful watch­faces and watchapps.

It’s easy to as­sume the worst in sit­u­a­tions like this. But our plan for the app­store is pretty straight­for­ward. We’re work­ing on rewrit­ing the app­store fron­tend to be na­tive in the mo­bile app rather than a web view. Rebble’s app­store back­end API will be the data source. Rebble’s dev por­tal is where de­vel­op­ers up­load apps. No sub­scrip­tion or Rebble ac­count will not be re­quired to down­load apps. We in­tend to cu­rate how the app­store is dis­played Pebble app.

We’re ex­cited to see other Pebble-supporting mo­bile apps pop up - like MicroPebble and GadgetBridge, of­fer­ing dif­fer­ent fea­tures and ex­pe­ri­ences. We’d love to sup­port these ef­forts with open source code or fi­nan­cially.

Reading things like ‘We’re happy to let them build what­ever they want as long as it does­n’t hurt Rebble’ in their blog post wor­ries me. Take our voice-to-text and weather fea­tures. Rebble cur­rently of­fers these as part of their paid sub­scrip­tion. Our new Pebble mo­bile app in­cludes a on-de­vice speech-to-text fea­ture. We’re plan­ning to in­clude weather for free in our app and make the data avail­able to all watch­faces so you don’t need to con­fig­ure each one sep­a­rately. These fea­tures are bet­ter for users but would they ‘hurt’ Rebble? Will I need to ask per­mis­sion from Rebble be­fore build­ing these fea­tures? It’s clear that the goals of a non-profit and de­vice man­u­fac­turer will not al­ways be in align­ment.

Now con­sider the app­store. It’s a fun­da­men­tal part of the Pebble ex­pe­ri­ence. Even be­fore yes­ter­day’s ac­cu­sa­tions, I felt wary about re­ly­ing too heav­ily on a 3rd party like Rebble to pro­vide such a crit­i­cal ser­vice. When peo­ple buy a watch from Core Devices, they ex­pect to be able to down­load apps and watch­faces. If Rebble lead­er­ship changes their mind, how can I be cer­tain I can de­liver a good ex­pe­ri­ence for our cus­tomers? This is one of the pri­mary rea­sons I think it’s im­por­tant for an archive of the Pebble Appstore to be freely avail­able.

Rebble - prove that you be­lieve in an open, un­re­stricted Pebble com­mu­nity. Tear down the walled gar­den you are try­ing to cre­ate. Publish your copy of the Pebble Appstore archive. Stop say­ing that you ‘100%’ own other de­vel­op­ers data. Let’s move on from this ridicu­lous sideshow and fo­cus on mak­ing Pebble awe­some!

I’ve worked hard to struc­ture every­thing that we’re do­ing to be sus­tain­able for the long term, and to do right by the Pebble com­mu­nity. I think Rebble should do the same.

I earned al­most noth­ing from Pebble Tech Corp. I paid my­self a $65,000 salary each year. I did not get any pay­out through the as­set sale. I fought to make sure that all Pebble em­ploy­ees were taken care of as best as pos­si­ble, and that the Pebble com­mu­nity would live on. I be­lieve that at every turn, I’ve done right by the com­mu­nity.

I did­n’t re­launch Pebble to make a lot of money. My goal this time round is to make it sus­tain­able. I want to con­tinue mak­ing more watches and cool gad­gets. There are no in­vestors. I am tak­ing huge risks do­ing this. I re­launched it be­cause I love Pebble and want it to live on long into the fu­ture. Generally, I am ex­cited and pos­i­tive for the fu­ture, de­spite every­thing.

For every­one else, again, I apol­o­gize for the ex­treme amounts of in­side base­ball and the bet­ter things you could be do­ing with your time. I’ll leave the com­ments open here. Please re­frain from any per­sonal at­tacks or vi­cious com­ments (at my­self or other peo­ple) - fol­low the HN guide­lines.

Today we are in­tro­duc­ing Gemini 3, our most in­tel­li­gent model that can help bring any idea to life. Built on a foun­da­tion of state-of-the-art rea­son­ing, Gemini 3 Pro de­liv­ers un­par­al­leled re­sults across every ma­jor AI bench­mark com­pared to pre­vi­ous ver­sions. It also sur­passes 2.5 Pro at cod­ing, mas­ter­ing both agen­tic work­flows and com­plex zero-shot tasks.

Gemini 3 Pro fits right into ex­ist­ing pro­duc­tion agent and cod­ing work­flows, while also en­abling new use cases not pre­vi­ously pos­si­ble. It’s avail­able in pre­view at $2/million in­put to­kens and $12/million out­put to­kens for prompts 200k to­kens or less through the Gemini API in Google AI Studio and Vertex AI for en­ter­prises (see pric­ing for rate lim­its and full pric­ing de­tails). Additionally, it can be uti­lized via your fa­vorite de­vel­oper tools within the broader ecosys­tem and is avail­able, with rate lim­its, free of charge in Google AI Studio.

Developers are spend­ing more and more time cre­at­ing soft­ware with AI at their side. Building on the mo­men­tum of Gemini 2.5 Pro and all the feed­back, Gemini 3 Pro serves as a new foun­da­tion of in­tel­li­gence for what’s pos­si­ble with an agen­tic cod­ing model.

Gemini 3 Pro scores 54.2% points on Terminal-Bench 2.0, which tests a mod­el’s tool use abil­ity to op­er­ate a com­puter via ter­mi­nal.

You can feel the power of this model come to life in Google Antigravity, our new agen­tic de­vel­op­ment plat­form, in ad­di­tion to Gemini CLI, Android Studio, and other cod­ing prod­ucts like Cursor, GitHub, JetBrains, Manus, Cline and more.

To ad­vance how the model and IDE work to­gether, we’re in­tro­duc­ing Google Antigravity to show­case what’s pos­si­ble with Gemini 3. It’s an agen­tic de­vel­op­ment plat­form that en­ables de­vel­op­ers to op­er­ate at a higher, task-ori­ented level by man­ag­ing agents across work­spaces, while re­tain­ing a fa­mil­iar AI IDE ex­pe­ri­ence at its core. It’s a faster way to de­velop: you act as the ar­chi­tect, col­lab­o­rat­ing with in­tel­li­gent agents that op­er­ate au­tonomously across the ed­i­tor, ter­mi­nal, and browser. These agents plan and ex­e­cute com­plex soft­ware tasks, com­mu­ni­cat­ing their work with the user via de­tailed ar­ti­facts. This el­e­vates all as­pects of de­vel­op­ment, from build­ing fea­tures, UI it­er­a­tion, and fix­ing bugs to re­search­ing and gen­er­at­ing re­ports. Visit the Google Antigravity web­site to down­load the pub­lic pre­view at no charge, now avail­able for MacOS, Windows and Linux.

With Gemini 3, we are re­leas­ing a client-side bash tool that em­pow­ers the model to pro­pose shell com­mands as part of agen­tic work­flows for tasks such as nav­i­gat­ing your lo­cal filesys­tem, dri­ving de­vel­op­ment processes, and au­tomat­ing sys­tem op­er­a­tions. We’re pair­ing this with a hosted server-side bash tool for multi lan­guage code gen­er­a­tion and se­cure pro­to­typ­ing. Available now in the Gemini API for early ac­cess part­ners, with gen­eral avail­abil­ity com­ing soon.Ad­di­tion­ally, Gemini hosted tools Grounding with Google Search and URL con­text can now be com­bined with struc­tured out­puts. This is es­pe­cially pow­er­ful for build­ing agen­tic use cases which in­volve fetch­ing and ex­tract­ing data and then out­putting them in a spe­cific for­mat for down­stream agen­tic tasks.

Gemini 3 Pro un­locks the true po­ten­tial of “vibe cod­ing”, where nat­ural lan­guage is the only syn­tax you need. By sig­nif­i­cantly im­prov­ing com­plex in­struc­tion fol­low­ing and deep tool use, the model can trans­late a high-level idea into a fully in­ter­ac­tive app with a sin­gle prompt. It han­dles the heavy lift­ing of multi-step plan­ning and cod­ing de­tails de­liv­er­ing richer vi­su­als and deeper in­ter­ac­tiv­ity, al­low­ing you to fo­cus on the cre­ative vi­sion.

Gemini 3 Pro tops the WebDev Arena leader­board by scor­ing an im­pres­sive 1487 Elo.

Whether it’s build­ing a game with a sin­gle prompt, an in­ter­ac­tive land­ing page from un­struc­tured voice notes, or a full on app from a nap­kin sketch, de­vel­op­ers can bring their idea to life with Gemini 3. With this model, we pushed sin­gle prompt gen­er­a­tion ca­pa­bil­i­ties fur­ther than ever, mean­ing you can go from idea to AI-powered app with a sin­gle prompt, like this retro game built in Google AI Studio.

We’ve built Google AI Studio to be your fastest path from a prompt to an AI-native app. Build mode lets you add AI ca­pa­bil­i­ties faster than ever, au­to­mat­i­cally wiring up the right mod­els and APIs, while fea­tures like an­no­ta­tions en­able fast and in­tu­itive it­er­a­tion. You can start build­ing with Gemini 3 in Google AI Studio to­day.

Gemini 3 is the best model in the world for com­plex mul­ti­modal un­der­stand­ing and sets new highs on MMMU-Pro for com­plex im­age rea­son­ing and Video MMMU for video un­der­stand­ing. Combining its in­tel­li­gence and a 1 mil­lion-to­ken con­text win­dow, de­vel­op­ers can see sig­nif­i­cant im­prove­ments while build­ing key mul­ti­modal use cases. To give you more con­trol over la­tency and cost, you can now con­fig­ure mul­ti­modal vi­sion pro­cess­ing with more gran­u­lar­ity in the Gemini API based on the vi­sual fi­delity re­quired for your ap­pli­ca­tion.

Gemini 3 Pro is best-in-class for doc­u­ment un­der­stand­ing, go­ing be­yond sim­ple OCR (Object Character Recognition) to in­tel­li­gently han­dle com­plex doc­u­ment un­der­stand­ing and rea­son­ing.You can see the mod­el’s vi­sion un­der­stand­ing, rea­son­ing and cod­ing ca­pa­bil­i­ties in our demo app that brings any idea to life in Google AI Studio.

The mod­el’s im­proved spa­tial un­der­stand­ing also dri­ves strong per­for­mance in em­bod­ied rea­son­ing tasks like point­ing, tra­jec­tory pre­dic­tion and task pro­gres­sion, un­lock­ing new use cases across au­tonomous ve­hi­cles, XR de­vices and ro­bot­ics.Its spa­tial rea­son­ing also pow­ers in­tel­li­gent screen un­der­stand­ing of desk­top, mo­bile and OS screens de­liv­er­ing sig­nif­i­cant per­for­mance im­prove­ment for com­puter use agents. The model also un­der­stands the in­tent of user ac­tions based on mouse move­ments and screen an­no­ta­tions un­lock­ing novel ex­pe­ri­ences like this Visual Computer demo app.

Gemini 3 Pro cap­tures rapid ac­tion with high-frame-rate un­der­stand­ing, en­sur­ing de­vel­op­ers never miss a crit­i­cal mo­ment in fast-mov­ing scenes. Beyond speed, long-con­text re­call al­lows for syn­the­siz­ing nar­ra­tives and pin­point­ing spe­cific de­tails across hours of con­tin­u­ous footage.

Gemini 3 Pro is now in­te­grated into many de­vel­oper prod­ucts and tools to seam­lessly fit into your ex­ist­ing work­flows and un­lock en­tirely new ways to code.Build with the Gemini API: You can in­te­grate Gemini 3 Pro im­me­di­ately into your ap­pli­ca­tions via Google AI Studio and Vertex AI for Enterprise. To sup­port the mod­el’s deeper rea­son­ing ca­pa­bil­i­ties, we’re in­tro­duc­ing a new think­ing level and more gran­u­lar me­dia res­o­lu­tion pa­ra­me­ters in the API, along with stricter val­i­da­tion for thought sig­na­tures. This up­date is crit­i­cal for pre­serv­ing the mod­el’s thoughts across multi-turn con­ver­sa­tions. Check out the Developer Guide for the tech­ni­cal break­down and our Prompting Guide to learn how to build with Gemini 3 Pro.Experience the mod­el’s agen­tic ca­pa­bil­i­ties: Whether you are adding AI-native fea­tures to an Android app, au­tomat­ing work­flows through Gemini CLI or man­ag­ing a fleet of au­tonomous agents in Google Antigravity, Gemini 3 Pro pro­vides the re­li­a­bil­ity needed for com­plex, agen­tic ar­chi­tec­tures.Vibe code with Gemini 3 Pro: Google AI Studio is your fastest path to bring any idea to life. Get started in Build mode to gen­er­ate a fully func­tional app with a sin­gle prompt. And if you need a lit­tle in­spi­ra­tion, click “I’m feel­ing lucky” and let Gemini 3 Pro han­dle the cre­ative spark and the code im­ple­men­ta­tion si­mul­ta­ne­ously.The soft­ware land­scape is shift­ing. As AI changes who builds and how they build, we are com­mit­ted to meet­ing you where you are — giv­ing you the tools to push the bound­aries of what’s pos­si­ble.This is just the start of the Gemini 3 era but we can’t wait to see what you build with Gemini 3 Pro!

Nearly two years ago we kicked off the Gemini era, one of our biggest sci­en­tific and prod­uct en­deav­ors ever un­der­taken as a com­pany. Since then, it’s been in­cred­i­ble to see how much peo­ple love it. AI Overviews now have 2 bil­lion users every month. The Gemini app sur­passes 650 mil­lion users per month, more than 70% of our Cloud cus­tomers use our AI, 13 mil­lion de­vel­op­ers have built with our gen­er­a­tive mod­els, and that is just a snip­pet of the im­pact we’re see­ing.

And we’re able to get ad­vanced ca­pa­bil­i­ties to the world faster than ever, thanks to our dif­fer­en­ti­ated full stack ap­proach to AI in­no­va­tion — from our lead­ing in­fra­struc­ture to our world-class re­search and mod­els and tool­ing, to prod­ucts that reach bil­lions of peo­ple around the world.

Every gen­er­a­tion of Gemini has built on the last, en­abling you to do more. Gemini 1’s break­throughs in na­tive mul­ti­modal­ity and long con­text win­dow ex­panded the kinds of in­for­ma­tion that could be processed — and how much of it. Gemini 2 laid the foun­da­tion for agen­tic ca­pa­bil­i­ties and pushed the fron­tiers on rea­son­ing and think­ing, help­ing with more com­plex tasks and ideas, lead­ing to Gemini 2.5 Pro top­ping LMArena for over six months.

And now we’re in­tro­duc­ing Gemini 3, our most in­tel­li­gent model, that com­bines all of Gemini’s ca­pa­bil­i­ties to­gether so you can bring any idea to life.

It’s state-of-the-art in rea­son­ing, built to grasp depth and nu­ance — whether it’s per­ceiv­ing the sub­tle clues in a cre­ative idea, or peel­ing apart the over­lap­ping lay­ers of a dif­fi­cult prob­lem. Gemini 3 is also much bet­ter at fig­ur­ing out the con­text and in­tent be­hind your re­quest, so you get what you need with less prompt­ing. It’s amaz­ing to think that in just two years, AI has evolved from sim­ply read­ing text and im­ages to read­ing the room.

And start­ing to­day, we’re ship­ping Gemini at the scale of Google. That in­cludes Gemini 3 in AI Mode in Search with more com­plex rea­son­ing and new dy­namic ex­pe­ri­ences. This is the first time we are ship­ping Gemini in Search on day one. Gemini 3 is also com­ing to­day to the Gemini app, to de­vel­op­ers in AI Studio and Vertex AI, and in our new agen­tic de­vel­op­ment plat­form, Google Antigravity — more be­low.

Like the gen­er­a­tions be­fore it, Gemini 3 is once again ad­vanc­ing the state of the art. In this new chap­ter, we’ll con­tinue to push the fron­tiers of in­tel­li­gence, agents, and per­son­al­iza­tion to make AI truly help­ful for every­one.

We hope you like Gemini 3, we’ll keep im­prov­ing it, and look for­ward to see­ing what you build with it. Much more to come!