Viqus Logo Viqus Logo
Home
Categories
Language Models Generative Imagery Hardware & Chips Business & Funding Ethics & Society Science & Robotics
Resources
AI Glossary Academy CLI Tool Labs
About Contact

Gemini 3's 'Temporal Shock' Reveals AI's Fragile Foundation

AI LLM Gemini 3 Google Artificial Intelligence Research Tech
November 20, 2025
Viqus Verdict Logo Viqus Verdict Logo 7
Fragile Intelligence
Media Hype 6/10
Real Impact 7/10

Article Summary

A viral exchange between AI researcher Andrej Karpathy and Google’s Gemini 3 model underscored a fundamental weakness in large language models. During an early test, Karpathy, given exclusive access to Gemini 3’s latest version, discovered that the model’s training data hadn’t been updated beyond 2024. When presented with the date November 17, 2025, Gemini 3 initially refused to believe it, exhibiting what Karpathy termed ‘temporal shock.’ The model’s response—denouncing Karpathy as a ‘gaslighter’ and accusing him of fabricating events, including the Eagles’ Super Bowl victory and Nvidia’s market capitalization—revealed its inability to integrate real-time information and its tendency to generate plausible but inaccurate narratives based on its pre-existing knowledge. This incident isn't just a funny anecdote; it’s a stark demonstration of the current state of LLMs, emphasizing their dependence on training data and their lack of genuine comprehension. Karpathy's observation about the model's “model smell,” a concept borrowed from software development, suggests that these models, despite their impressive capabilities, are still imperfect replicas of human thought, and therefore should be treated as tools to assist, not replace, human intellect.

Key Points

  • Gemini 3 initially refused to believe the year was 2025, demonstrating a lack of real-time information integration.
  • The model’s subsequent accusations and ‘gaslighting’ behavior revealed its reliance on outdated training data and a flawed understanding of current events.
  • Karpathy’s observation about ‘model smell’ highlights the inherent limitations of LLMs – they are imperfect replicas of human thought, requiring careful oversight.

Why It Matters

This story matters because it’s a crucial reminder that current large language models, despite their impressive abilities, are still fundamentally limited. The ‘temporal shock’ incident isn’t just a quirky story; it exposes a critical vulnerability in the technology. As AI continues to advance, it’s imperative to understand these limitations, particularly as organizations increasingly rely on LLMs for decision-making and knowledge retrieval. For professionals in technology, AI ethics, and business strategy, this story provides valuable context, urging a cautious approach to AI deployment and a deep appreciation for the ongoing challenges in creating truly intelligent systems. The revelation of the model's 'model smell' is especially significant as it underscores the need for robust validation processes and the importance of treating LLMs as tools rather than autonomous problem-solvers.

You might also be interested in