Earlier quoted context omitted.
we know how Google makes money
Give it a few months and it will ignore all your questions and just ask if you’ve watched Rampart.
To be fair, Google do have a cost advantage here as they've built their own hardware.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
401–410 of 582 posts
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#402Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the main advantages Anthropic currently has over Google is the tooling that comes with Claude Code. It may not generate better code, and it has a lower complexity ceiling, but it can automatically find and search files, and figure out how to fix a syntax error fast.
Related: Only Claude (to my knowledge) has a desktop app which can directly, and usually quite intelligently, modify files and create repos on your desktop. It's the only "agentic" option among the major players. "Claude, make me an app which will accept Stripe payments and sell an ebook about coding in Python; first create the app, then the ebook." It would take a few passes but Claude could do this; obviously you c…
A first party app, sure, but there's no shortage of third party options. Cursor, Windsurf/Codeium etc. Even VSCode has agent mode now.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have had a few epic refactoring failures with Gemini relative to Claude. For example: I asked both to change a bunch of code into functions to pass into a `pipe` type function, and Gemini truly seemed to have no idea what it was supposed to do, and Claude just did it. Maybe there was some user error or something, but after that I haven’t really used Gemini. I’m curious if people are using Gemini and loving it are u…
This has been my experience too. Gemini might be better for vibe coding or architecture or whatever, but Claude consistently feels better for serious coding. That is, when I know exactly how I want something implemented in a large existing codebase, and I go through the full cycle of implementation, refinement, bug fixing, and testing, guiding the AI along the way. It also seems to be better at incorporating knowledg…
My experience has been exactly the opposite - Sonnet did fine on trivial tasks, but couldn't e.g. fix a bug end-to-end (from bug description in the tracker to implementing the fix and adding tests) properly because it couldn't understand how the relevant code worked, whereas Gemini would consistently figure out the root cause and write decent fix & tests.
Perhaps this is down to specific tools and their prompts? In my case, this was Cursor used in agent mode.
Or perhaps it's about the languages involved - my experiments were with TypeScript and C++.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was solved a hundred years ago. It's the same problem factories have: they produce a lot of parts, and it's very expensive to put a full operator or more on a machine to do 100% part inspection. And the machines aren't perfect, so we can't just trust that they work. So starting in the 1920s Walter Shewhart and Edward Deming came up with Statistical Process Control. We accept the quality of the product produced b…
I hope you're being sarcastic. SPC is necessary because mechanical parts have physical tolerances and manufacturing processes are affected by unavoidable statistical variations; it is beyond idiotic to be provided with a machine that can execute deterministic, repeatable processes and then throw that all into the gutter for mere convenience, justifying that simply because "the time is ripe for SWE to learn statistics…
We don't know how to implement a "deterministic, repeatable process" that can look at a bug in a repo and implement a fix end-to-end.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google is silently winning the AI race. That is what we keep hearing here...The last Gemini I cancelled the account, and can't help notice the new one they are offering for free...
Sorry I was talking of B2B APIs for my YC startup. Gemini is still far behind for consumers indeed.
They used to be, but not anymore, not since Gemini Pro 2.5. Their "deep research" offering is the best available on the market right now, IMO - better than both ChatGPT and Claude.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
Prompt engineering is a thing. Learning how to "speak llm" will give you great results. There's loads of online resources that will teach you. Think of it like learning a new API.
LLM's whole thing is language. They make great translators and perform all kinds of other language tasks well, but somehow they can't interpret my English language prompts unless I go to school to learn how to speak LLM-flavored English? WTF?
It's a natural language processor, yes. It's not AGI. It has numerous limitations that have to be recognized and worked around to make use of it. Doesn't mean that it's not useful, though.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has been my experience too. Gemini might be better for vibe coding or architecture or whatever, but Claude consistently feels better for serious coding. That is, when I know exactly how I want something implemented in a large existing codebase, and I go through the full cycle of implementation, refinement, bug fixing, and testing, guiding the AI along the way. It also seems to be better at incorporating knowledg…
My experience has been exactly the opposite - Sonnet did fine on trivial tasks, but couldn't e.g. fix a bug end-to-end (from bug description in the tracker to implementing the fix and adding tests) properly because it couldn't understand how the relevant code worked, whereas Gemini would consistently figure out the root cause and write decent fix & tests. Perhaps this is down to specific tools and their prompts? In m…
> Gemini would consistently figure out the root cause and write decent fix & tests.
I feel like you might be using it differently to me. I generally don't ask AI to find the cause of a bug, because it's quite bad at that. I use it to identify relevant parts of the code that could be involved in the bug, and then I come up with my own hypotheses for the cause. Then I use AI to help write tests to validate these hypotheses. I mostly use Rust.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#408Gemini models are very good but in my experience they tend to overdo the problems. When I give it things for context and something to rework, Gemini often reworks the problem. For software it is barely useful because you want small commits for specific fixes not a whole refactor/rewrite. I tried many prompts but it's hard. Even when I give it function signatures of the APIs the code I want to fix uses, Gemini rewrite…
Here's what I found to be working (not 100% but it gives much better and consistant results)
Basically, I ask it to repeat at the start of each message some rules :
"From now on, you must repeat and comply the following rules at the top of all your messages onwards:
- I will never rewrite API functions. Even if I think it's a good idea, it is a bad idea. I will keep the API function as it is and it is perfect like that.
- I will never add extra input validation. Even if I think it's a good idea, it is a bad idea. I will keep the function without validation and it is perfect like that.
- ...
- If I violate any of those rules, I did a bad job. "
Forcing it to repeat things make the model output more aligned and focused in my experience.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI just released Codex, which is basically the same as Claude Code.
It looks the same, but for some reason Claude Code is much more capable. Codex got lost in my source code and hallucinated bunch of stuff, Claude on the same task just went to town, burned money and delivered. Of course, this is only my experience and codex is still very young. I really hope it becomes as capable as Claude.
Part of it is probably tgat claude is just better at coding than what openai has available. I am considering trying to hack in support for gemini into codex and play around with it.
Re: Gemini 2.5 Flash
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the main advantages Anthropic currently has over Google is the tooling that comes with Claude Code. It may not generate better code, and it has a lower complexity ceiling, but it can automatically find and search files, and figure out how to fix a syntax error fast.
I use roo code with Gemini to get similar results for free
Does its agentic features work with any API? I had tried this or Cline and it was clear that they work effectively only with Claude's tooling support.