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

Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 728 posts

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#401

Post by LZ_Khan »

epolanski wrote: post #382
aero142 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If llms are able to write better code with more declarative and local programming components and tailwind, then I could imagine a future where a new programming language is created to maximize llm success.

This so much. To me it seems so strange that few good language designers and ml folks didn't group together to work on this. It's clear that there is a space for some LLM meta language that could be designed to compile to bytecode, binary, JS, etc. It also doesn't need to be textual like we code, but some form of AST llama can manipulate with ease.

readability would probably be the sticking point

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#402

Post by bayindirh »

jstummbillig wrote: post #314
segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?) I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about wha…

> It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?)

No code & AI assisted programming has been told to be around the corner since 2000. We just arrived to a point where models remix what others have typed on their keyboards, and yet somebody still argues that humans will be left in the dust in near times.

No machine, incl. humans can create something more complex than itself. This is the rule of abstraction. As you go higher level, you lose expressiveness. Yes, you express more with less, yet you can express less in total. You're reducing the set's symbol size (element count) as you go higher by clumping symbols together and assigning more complex meanings to it.

Yet, being able to describe a larger set with more elements while keeping all elements addressable with less possible symbols doesn't sound plausible to me.

So, as others said. Citation needed. Extraordinary claims needs extraordinary evidence. No, asking AI to create a premium mobile photo app and getting Halide's design as an output doesn't count. It's training data leakage.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#403

Post by perching_aix »

Jordan-117 wrote: post #247
segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

I recently needed to recommend some IAM permissions for an assistant on a hobby project; not complete access but just enough to do what was required. Was rusty with the console and didn't have direct access to it at the time, but figured it was a solid use case for LLMs since AWS is so ubiquitous and well-documented. I actually queried 4o, 3.7 Sonnet, and Gemini 2.5 for recommendations, stripped the list of duplicate…

Sounds like a vague requirement, so I'd just generally point you towards the AWS managed policies summary [0] instead. Particularly the PowerUserAccess policy sounds fitting here [1] if the description for it doesn't raise any immediate flags. Alternatively, you could browse through the job function oriented policies [2] they have and see if you find a better fit. Can just click it together instead of bothering with the JSON. Though it sounds like you're past this problem by now.

[0] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/IAM/latest/UserGuide/access_poli...

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aws-managed-policy/latest/refere...

[2] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/IAM/latest/UserGuide/access_poli...

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#404

Post by maccard »

kenjackson wrote: post #218
maccard wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copilot and the likes have been around for 4 years, and we’ve been hearing this all along. I’m bullish on LLM assistants (not vibe coding) but I’d love to see some of these things actually start to happen.

I feel like it has gotten better over time, but I don't have any metrics to confirm this. And it may also depend on what type of you language/libraries that you use.

I feel like there was a huge jump when cursor et al appeared, and things have been “changing” since then rather than improving.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#405

Post by Volundr »

redox99 wrote: post #187
Volundr wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many attempts at making them refuse to answer what they don't know caused them to refuse to answer things they did in fact know. Are we sure they know these things as opposed to being able to consistently guess correctly? With LLMs I'm not sure we even have a clear definition of what it means for it to "know" something.

Yes. You could ask for factual information like "Tallest building in X place" and first it would answer it did not know. After pressuring it, it would answer with the correct building and height. But also things where guessing was desirable. For example with a riddle it would tell you it did not know or there wasn't enough information. After pressuring it to answer anyway it would correctly solve the riddle. The offi…

> After pressuring it, it would answer with the correct building and height.

And if you bully it enough on something nonsensical it'll give you a wrong answer.

You press it, and it takes a guess even though you told it not to, and gets it right, then you go "see it knew!". There's no database hanging out in ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini's weights with a list of cities and the tallest buildings. There's a whole bunch of opaque stats derived from the content it's been trained on that means that most of the time it'll come up with the same guess. But there's no difference in process between that highly consistent response to you asking the tallest building in New York and the one where it hallucinates a Python method that doesn't exist, or suggests glue to keep the cheese on your pizza. It's all the same process to the LLM.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#406

Post by nurettin »

segphault wrote: post #18

My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried. There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person doe…

Just tell it to cite docs when using functions, works wonders.

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#407

Post by BoorishBears »

shortcord wrote: post #347
paulirish wrote: post #250

> Gemini 2.5 Pro now ranks #1 on the WebDev Arena leaderboard It'd make sense to rename WebDev Arena to React/Tailwind Arena. Its system prompt requires [1] those technologies and the entire tool breaks when requesting vanilla JS or other frameworks. The second-order implications of models competing on this narrow definition of webdev are rather troublesome. [1] https://blog.lmarena.ai/blog/2025/webdev-arena/#:~:text…

Not a fan of the dominance of shadcn and Tailwind when it comes to generating greenfield code.

shadcn/ui is such a terrible thing for the frontend ecosystem, and it'll get even worse for it as AI gets better.

Instead of learnable, stable, APIs for common components with well established versioning and well defined tokens, we've got people literally copying and pasting components and applying diffs so they can claim they "own them".

Except the vast majority of them don't ever change a line and just end up with a strictly worse version of a normal package (typically out of date or a hodgepodge of "versions" because they don't want to figure out diffs), and the few that do make changes don't have anywhere near the design sense to be using shadcn since there aren't enough tokens to keep the look and feel consistent across components.

The would be 1% who would change it and have their own well thought out design systems don't get a lift from shadcn either vs just starting with Radix directly.

-

Amazing spin job though with the "registry" idea too: "it's actually very good for AI that we invented a parallel distribution system for ad-hoc components with no standard except a loose convention around sticking stuff in a folder called ui"

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#408

Post by cadamsdotcom »

kccqzy wrote: post #400
cadamsdotcom wrote: post #370

Google/Alphabet is a giant hulking machine that’s been frankly running at idle. All that resume driven development and performance review promo cycles and retention of top talent mainly to work on ad tech means it’s packed to the rafters with latent capability. Holding on to so much talent in the face of basically having nothing to do is a testament to the company’s leadership - even if said leadership didn’t manage…

> retention of top talent mainly to work on ad tech No the top talent worked on exciting things like Fuchsia. Ad tech is boring stuff written by people who aren't enough of a snob to refuse working on ad tech.

Top talent worked on what now?

Isn’t that a flower?

(Hopefully you see my point)

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#409

Post by ionwake »

ramoz wrote: post #383
ionwake wrote: post #190

Can someone tell me if windsurf is better than cursor? ( pref someone who has used both for a few days? )

Claude Code and its not close. I feed my entire project to gemini for planning and figuring out complex solutions for claude code to execute on. I use Prompt Tower for building entire codebase prompts for gemini.

fantastic reply thanks, can I ask if you have tried cursor? I use to use claudecode but it was super expensive and got stuck in loops. ( I know it is cheaper now). Do you have any thoughts?

Re: Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview

#410

Post by ionwake »

androng wrote: post #200
ionwake wrote: post #30

Is it possible to sue this with Cursor? If so what is the name of the model? gemini-2.5-pro-preview ? edit> Its gemini-2.5-pro-preview-05-06 edit>Cursor syas it doesnt have "good support" et, but im not sure if this is a defualt message when it doesnt recognise a model? is this a big deal? should I wait until its officially supported by cursor? Just trying to save time here for everyone - anyone know the answer?

At the bottom of the article it says no action is required and the Gemini-2.5-pro-preview-03-25 now points to the new model

well alot of action was required such as adding the model so no idea what happened to the guy who wrote the article maybe there is a new cursor update now
Post reply on HN