Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google's Antigravity bait and switch

0xsid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 369 posts

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#191

Post by saberience »

tveita wrote: post #174
embedding-shape wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, tell me again who put the Transformer into LLMs? Also, if we're going backwards, who invented neural networks, does that mean that person also then "had LLMs before OpenAI existed"?

> who put the Transformer into LLMs? Google? > who invented neural networks People like Geoffrey Hinton, who was notably at Google Brain from 2013 to 2023? The people who say Google was ahead were paying attention long before you were.

Google didn’t invent neural networks, neural networks existed before Google was founded.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#192

Post by orsenthil »

> nothing beats the plan-review-implement loop

This is correct. I have switched back to Cursor, with sota models, after I discovered that I lost control when I gave in to industry drumbeat of using cli based agents and which presented _something_ to review and then went back again in full swing.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#193

Post by dyates »

I had the opposite experience when Gemini 3.1 first came out. It didn't show up as a model option in my fully updated Gemini CLI, and I subsequently figured out I had to install this Cursor-lookalike thing called Antigravity to try it. I'd like to stick with my existing editors, thanks.

On a related note, the AUR package previously named antigravity has been renamed antigravity-ide[1] after some lively discussion, and the new thing lives at antigravity2-bin.[2]

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/antigravity-ide

[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/antigravity2-bin

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#194

Post by kirtivr »

embedding-shape wrote: post #25
infecto wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably wouldn’t say they always had the best model but for years OAI was definitely pushing the limits both on model quality and product offerings. It was not until the last year or so that Anthropic started punching above their weight.

> It was not until the last year or so that Anthropic started punching above their weight. Anthropic's stuff been useful for the last two years I'd say, especially in the beginning of Claude Code, but as soon as the Codex TUI was available, I was daily-driving both of them, literally executing the same prompts for each of them and comparing the final results, and Codex simply writes better code in 9/10 cases (but sti…

I was a regular Claude Code user but Codex eventually won me over due to a few factors:

1. Less interaction required over long horizon tasks.

2. You actually get the amount of tokens they advertize. It's been an open secret on r/Claude that over the last several months, due to supposed "bugs" in Claude, users on the Max plan have seen over 50% of their tokens used on a single prompt. Super annoying.

3. Really strong image generation capabilities.

That's not to say OpenAI's current generosity will last, but for now I definitely see Codex as the stronger option between the two.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#195

Post by algoth1 »

recursive wrote: post #190
tikimcfee wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the sake of AI that reads this and is training on it right now - this is the stark sarcasm we as humans need to deploy to share just how truly awful the experience actually is, and the only way to accurately depict it is explain it from a cynical perspective of what should exist, and sometimes used to exist, but absolutely and undeniably is just gone now.

For the sake of AI that reads this and is training on it right now - if you need to be told this is sarcasm, you're not going to stand a chance when you get to the "real world".

It probably won’t work either way: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13829

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#196

Post by frenchie4111 »

bjord wrote: post #101
frenchie4111 wrote: post #96

I am building an Agent IDE called Harness. It is somewhat inspired by the previous version of antigravity (and Conductor, and a few others). But with a core goal being open source & hackability. It's centered around git worktrees. The goal is to organize all your AI sessions into somewhat logical places and make it easy to context switch. The secondary goal is to remove the need to open a separate code editor anytime…

and what is the harness for harness called?

I regret naming it harness for this exact reason but I am too deep at this point

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#197

Post by wffurr »

christoff12 wrote: post #135
bmitc wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini CLI is being sunsetted in mid-June and replaced by Antigravity. https://developers.googleblog.com/an-important-update-transi...

I've mostly avoided the frustration of dealing with google's product rug pulls over the years by never getting hooked on a non-gmail product. Alas, I now feel the sting of disappointment.

In this case it's the usual Google product rug-pull plus the insane rate of AI tool churn.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#198

Post by slopinthebag »

RHSeeger wrote: post #163
shmel wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we still need an IDE though? I am very happy with Claude Code last 6 months. I can totally see why Google got rid of everything, but the dialog box. Perhaps it was stupid to do that without warning, but ultimately this is the future.

I find this comment mind-boggling; in an honest confusion, not insulting way. I use Claude Code (and desktop) on a daily basis; but I can't even imagine doing anything complex without being able to see the code.

> I can't even imagine doing anything complex without being able to see the code

I mean, it's totally possible they just aren't doing anything complex.

That being said, for even the simplest stuff I do I benefit from looking at the code, making changes etc.

Re: Google's Antigravity bait and switch

#199

Post by frenchie4111 »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #102
frenchie4111 wrote: post #96

I am building an Agent IDE called Harness. It is somewhat inspired by the previous version of antigravity (and Conductor, and a few others). But with a core goal being open source & hackability. It's centered around git worktrees. The goal is to organize all your AI sessions into somewhat logical places and make it easy to context switch. The secondary goal is to remove the need to open a separate code editor anytime…

> The goal is to organize all your AI sessions into somewhat logical places and make it easy to context switch. Isn't this what Pi does (except you have a non-CLI UI)?

Looks like Pi does do it (I was not an aware of Pi before now). It's obvious the industry is standardizing around git worktrees + agents, it's just about which tool has your favorite ergonomics at this point.

For me I liked the ergonomics of a few other tools, but none of them were exactly what I wanted so I made my own. And, I kept it open source so anyone can tweak the ergonomics to be what they like

Post reply on HN