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

Google Antigravity

antigravity.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Antigravity

#581

Post by onion2k »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #439

I gave it a fair shot. It is a vs code fork. There were some UI glitches. Some usability was better. Cursor has some real annoying usability issues - like their previous/next code change never going away and no way to disable it. Design of this one looks more polished and less muddy. I was working on a project and just continued with it. It was easy because they import setting from cursor. Feels like the browser wars…

So I start using it for my project and after about 20 mins - oh, no. Out of credits.

I didn't even get to try a single Gemini 3 prompt. I was out of credits before my first had completed. I guess I've burned through the free tier in some other app but the error message gave me no clues. As far as I can tell there's no link to give Google my money in the app. Maybe they think they have enough.

After switching to gpt-oss:120b it did some things quite well, and the annotation feature in the plan doc is really nice. It has potential but I suspect it's suffering from Google's typical problem that it's only really been tested on Googlers.

EDIT: Now it's stuck in a loop repeating the last thing it output. I've seen that a lot on gpt-oss models but you'd think a Google app would detect that and stop. :D

EDIT: I should know better than to beta test a FAANG app by now. I'm going back to Codex. :D

Re: Google Antigravity

#582

Post by Clent »

Sammi wrote: post #520
shermantanktop wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- don't learn from what you tell them - don't have career growth that you can feel good about having contributed to - don't have a genuine interest in accomplishment or team goals - have no past and no future. When you change companies, they won't recognize you in the hall. - no ownership over results. If they make a mistake, they won't suffer.

- don't learn from what you tell them Whenever I have a model fix something new I ask it to update the markdown implementation guides I have in the docs folder in my projects. I add these files to context as needed. I have one for implementing routes and one for implementing backend tests and so on. They then know how to do stuff in the future in my projects.

They still aren't learning. You're learning and then telling them to incorporate your learnings. They aren't able to remember this so you need to remind them each day.

That sounds a lot like '50 First Dates' but for programming.

Re: Google Antigravity

#583

Post by ummonk »

I'm stuck on "setting up this account" like most people. What a botched launch. This kind of bugginess and unreliability has become so much more frequent since big tech started tightening the screws with mass layoffs.

Re: Google Antigravity

#584

Post by jmpeax »

evandrofisico wrote: post #261
wiseowise wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wouldn’t. It’s made to suck out investor money and show that google does something, not to actually bring value. My crystal ball says it will be shutdown next year.

Most of the AI products are not for the end user, they are just signaling shareholders and possible investors that the company is on the hype.

Google is still looking for investors?

Re: Google Antigravity

#585

Post by recitedropper »

crazygringo wrote: post #457
flatline wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are just better at communicating about their process. They will spend hours talking over architectural decisions, implementation issues, writing technical details in commit messages and issue notes, and in this way they not only debug their decisions but socialize knowledge of both the code and the reasons it came to be that way. Communication and collaboration are the real adaptive skills of our species. To t…

> Humans are just better at communicating about their process. I wish that were true. In my experience, most of the time they're not doing the things you talk about -- major architectural decisions don't get documented anywhere, commit messages give no "why", and the people who the knowledge got socialized to in unrecorded conversations then left the company. If anything, LLM's seem to be far more consistent in docum…

"major architectural decisions don't get documented anywhere" "commit messages give no "why""

This is so far outside of common industry practices that I don't think your sentiment generalizes. Or perhaps your expectation of what should go in a single commit message is different from the rest of us...

LLMs, especially those with reasoning chains, are notoriously bad at explaining their thought process. This isn't vibes, it is empiricism: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.04388

If you are genuinely working somewhere where the people around you are worse than LLMs at explaining and documenting their thought process, I would looking elsewhere. Can't imagine that is good for one's own development (or sanity).

Re: Google Antigravity

#586

Post by nafizh »

There's no way I am using such an important piece of life as an IDE from Google just because I know they are going to kill it within 3 years, if it survives that much. Probably will die with the Windsurf guy jumping ship again.

Re: Google Antigravity

#587

Post by discreteevent »

warkdarrior wrote: post #482
ithkuil wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an introvert and I love working with nice people. I just need some time by myself to recharge after all the social interactions.

As a team lead, working with people is so... cumbersome. They need time to recharge, lots of encouragement, and a nice place to work in. Give me a coding agent any time!

As a PM working with team leads is so cumbersome...

Re: Google Antigravity

#589

Post by antfarm »

sorokod wrote: post #435
uatec wrote: post #378

"Congratulations, you have been elevated to manager to agents." That's not exactly really where I hoped my career would lead. It's like managing junior developers, but without having nice people to work with.

"junior developers" is a convenient label, it is incorrect but it will take a bit until we come up something that describes entities that: - can write code - tireless - have no aspirations - have no stylistic or architectural preferences - have massive, but at the same time not well defined, body of knowledge - have no intrinsic memories of past interactions. - change in unexpected ways when underlying models change…

- constantly ignore your advice

- constantly give wrong answers, with surprising confidence

- constantly apologize, then make the same mistake again immediately

- constantly forget what you just told them

- ...

Re: Google Antigravity

#590

Post by Rohansi »

dabockster wrote: post #506
supportengineer wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm at one of those companies where we're forced to be in the office. NO ONE TALKS TO EACH OTHER unless absolutely necessary for work. We get on Zooms to talk. Even with the person 1 cubicle over.

> We get on Zooms to talk. Even with the person 1 cubicle over. Who normalized this?!!

I know it happens when you're working with people who may be at home or another location.
Post reply on HN