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

Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 699 posts

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#661

Post by Forgeties79 »

briHass wrote: post #473
Forgeties79 wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not understand how some of y’all are not under water with fragile code that is too massive to possibly parse. Every engineering team I know is currently trying to undo the damage of the last 6-12mo when they all got more serious into adopting these tools (usually Claude). It hasn’t completely screwed them over, but the the debt is substantial and cannot be put off anymore it seems. They argue the net is positive…

The key seems to be extensive integration/end-to-end tests with gold standard assertion data. Heck, even just saving off the json from API endpoints and using that as a reference to compare after changes works pretty well. Spin up a database backup with that static starting point, run actions, compare state afterwards. These types of high-level tests are frustrating beyond belief to humans due to their lack of specif…

It just seems like everybody I know is realizing they’ve built way too much to possibly wade through and a lot of it is completely unnecessary. Using the tool that created the problem to solve the problem does not seem like the best course of action to me.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#664

Post by [deleted] »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #610
luipugs wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because intent supposes will which supposes consciousness, and these aren't.

I'll agree if you can define consciousness in a way that: 1) Excludes what LLM's do. 2) Doesn't exclude what many humans do (including the neuro divergent). 3) Doesn't just boil do to simply rephrasing your pre-existing belief/prejudice that humans are conscious and nothing else can be as if it were a fact and not an opinion. I suspect that you can't.

[deleted]

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#665

Post by keytalker »

congrats to the gemini team, the work is super impressive!

I switched my subagent-swarm skill(https://github.com/bazelment/yoloswe/blob/main/.claude/skill...) to the 3.8 model and has been very happy so far. It has been driving the swarm to produce steady outcome, and more importantly, the exec communication is also crystal clear, instead of filling with jargons and long sentences.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#666

Post by nozzlegear »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #610
luipugs wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because intent supposes will which supposes consciousness, and these aren't.

I'll agree if you can define consciousness in a way that: 1) Excludes what LLM's do. 2) Doesn't exclude what many humans do (including the neuro divergent). 3) Doesn't just boil do to simply rephrasing your pre-existing belief/prejudice that humans are conscious and nothing else can be as if it were a fact and not an opinion. I suspect that you can't.

Just because we have difficulty defining consciousness doesn't mean we have difficulty distinguishing or classifying it. We can't give a final definition for life, intelligence or disease, but that doesn't mean everything is equally alive, intelligent and diseased.

Your list of requirements is implying that, because we lack a perfect definition for consciousness, LLMs are conscious too. That's malarkey. It may be that they could one day become conscious, but it's not because we can't fully define what human consciousness is.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#667

Post by estearum »

nozzlegear wrote: post #666
mapontosevenths wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll agree if you can define consciousness in a way that: 1) Excludes what LLM's do. 2) Doesn't exclude what many humans do (including the neuro divergent). 3) Doesn't just boil do to simply rephrasing your pre-existing belief/prejudice that humans are conscious and nothing else can be as if it were a fact and not an opinion. I suspect that you can't.

Just because we have difficulty defining consciousness doesn't mean we have difficulty distinguishing or classifying it. We can't give a final definition for life, intelligence or disease, but that doesn't mean everything is equally alive, intelligent and diseased. Your list of requirements is implying that, because we lack a perfect definition for consciousness, LLMs are conscious too. That's malarkey. It may be tha…

If you can substantiate your assertion that LLMs aren't conscious without a definition of consciousness, you're welcome to do that too.

I don't see why a definition is necessary. The actual problem is you just don't have a way to substantiate that belief without resorting to complete nonsense about brain atoms being more specialer (!!) than atoms that exist outside of a skull.

It would be simple to disprove us by just stating your evidence for how you know LLMs aren't conscious.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#668

Post by [deleted] »

estearum wrote: post #667
nozzlegear wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because we have difficulty defining consciousness doesn't mean we have difficulty distinguishing or classifying it. We can't give a final definition for life, intelligence or disease, but that doesn't mean everything is equally alive, intelligent and diseased. Your list of requirements is implying that, because we lack a perfect definition for consciousness, LLMs are conscious too. That's malarkey. It may be tha…

If you can substantiate your assertion that LLMs aren't conscious without a definition of consciousness, you're welcome to do that too. I don't see why a definition is necessary. The actual problem is you just don't have a way to substantiate that belief without resorting to complete nonsense about brain atoms being more specialer (!!) than atoms that exist outside of a skull. It would be simple to disprove us by jus…

[deleted]

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#669

Post by sfink »

repparw wrote: post #521
sfink wrote: post #223

For my application, I'm still happily using gemini-2.5-flash and the only problem is when it reports being overloaded. It's for interpreting a downscaled phone camera photo of a hand-written shopping list on a whiteboard, and it works stunningly well. My handwriting sucks, too. (I guess the only relevance here is that if your problem matches a model's strengths, then you can do fine with a model that is several gener…

I would test this, might be cheaper per task even costing more per token, probably faster too

I'm still leeching off the free tier, so it's going to be hard to beat the price.

But yes, I intend to support several models, to handle the overload situation (automatic failover). And switch to a cheap paid plan, though it seems like that'll mostly improve rate limits, which barely matters for my usage.

Faster is always good, though. I do care about latency.

Re: Gemini 3.8 Flash and 3.8 Flash Cyber

#670

Post by nozzlegear »

estearum wrote: post #667
nozzlegear wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because we have difficulty defining consciousness doesn't mean we have difficulty distinguishing or classifying it. We can't give a final definition for life, intelligence or disease, but that doesn't mean everything is equally alive, intelligent and diseased. Your list of requirements is implying that, because we lack a perfect definition for consciousness, LLMs are conscious too. That's malarkey. It may be tha…

If you can substantiate your assertion that LLMs aren't conscious without a definition of consciousness, you're welcome to do that too. I don't see why a definition is necessary. The actual problem is you just don't have a way to substantiate that belief without resorting to complete nonsense about brain atoms being more specialer (!!) than atoms that exist outside of a skull. It would be simple to disprove us by jus…

I literally just wrote about consciousness being undefined, and now you're asking me to define it? I'm not a philosopher, ask someone more qualified. Better yet, ask your LLM to give you a mealy-mouthed answer which fits your narrative.

> I don't see why a definition is necessary.

Don't waste my time with your sophistry. Words mean nothing to you beyond how you can twist them.

Post reply on HN