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

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Antigravity

#661

Post by titanomachy »

sippeangelo wrote: post #121

> Neither engenders user trust in the work that the agent undertook. Antigravity provides context on agentic work at a more natural task-level abstraction, with the necessary and sufficient set of artifacts and verification results, for the user to gain that trust. I'm going to need an AI summary of this page to even start comprehending this... It doesn't help that the scrolling makes me nauseous, just like real anti…

Translation: "don't trouble your little brain actually trying to read the code that our model produced. we can show you pictures of the output instead."

Re: Google Antigravity

#662

Post by averageRoyalty »

Clent wrote: post #582
Sammi wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- 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.

That is true, but does it actually matter if the outcome is the same? GP is saying they don't need to remind them.

Re: Google Antigravity

#663

Post by rajamaka »

jmpeax wrote: post #584
evandrofisico wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Of course, Alphabet exists to give returns to their shareholders.

Re: Google Antigravity

#664

Post by orliesaurus »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #601
orliesaurus wrote: post #556

Even the launch trailer sucks. The people at Windsurf who worked on this must be laughing at us driving on their Lambos and Ferraris. They glued slop together, shipped this and now are in Tahoe drinking Martinis watching the sunset from their private chalets.

The people that made Windsurf are in this trailer. Those who got bought by Cognition were either fired or forced to work 100h weeks

yes, hence why I said the people at Windsurf that worked on this...because they are the ones that have been shipping this slop after the buyout.

Re: Google Antigravity

#665

Post by lowsong »

bradfa wrote: post #415
MangoToupe wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, agents have no capacity to learn.

They have a capacity to "learn", it's just WAY MORE INVOLVED than how humans learn. With a human, you give them feedback or advice and generally by the 2nd or 3rd time the same kind of thing happens they can figure it out and improve. With an LLM, you have to specifically setup a convoluted (and potentially financially and electrical power expensive) system in order to provide MANY MORE examples of how to improve via…

> With an LLM, you have to specifically setup a convoluted (and potentially financially and electrical power expensive) system in order to provide MANY MORE examples of how to improve via fine tuning or other training actions.

The only way that an AI model can "learn" is during model creation, which is then fixed. Any "instructions" or other data or "correcting" you give the model is just part of the context window.

Re: Google Antigravity

#666

Post by imiric »

lbrito wrote: post #416

The agentic spam is exhausting. I just wanted to code. Too early in my career to not give a shit and retire, but too late be excited about these things and eager to learn. What a time...

> The agentic spam is exhausting. I just wanted to code.

Ditto. And we still can.

I've yet to use an "agent", and still use a chat UI to an LLM in Emacs. I rely on these tools for design discussion, rough prototyping, and quick reference, but they still waste my time roughly a quarter of the time I use them. They have gotten better in the last year, though, and I've been able to broaden my reach into stacks and codebases I wouldn't have felt comfortable with before, which is good.

I just have no interest in "agents". I don't want to give these companies more access to my system and data, and I want to review every thing these tools generate. If this makes me slower than a vibe coder, that's intentional. Thankfully, there are still sane people and companies willing to pay me for this type of work, so I'm not worried about being displaced any time soon. Once that happens, I'll probably close up shop, figure out an alternative income stream, and continue coding as a hobby.

Re: Google Antigravity

#667

Post by rvz »

aeternum wrote: post #94

Product leaders that apply world-changing technology breakthrough names to their yet-another cloned SaaS product deserve more shame. Antigravity would be a world-changing technology. This isn't.

This 'Antigravity' software is far below the expected Google software engineering standards I have ever seen.

Quite shocking to see that Google would consider using this crass software and is the most inefficient software libraries ever made.

What were the engineers thinking?

Re: Google Antigravity

#668

Post by nightpool »

dweekly wrote: post #215
modeless wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for saying what this entire blog post doesn't. It's actually disrespectful of Google to launch this without even a mention of the fact that it is based on VSCode.

There's some irony in that, given how many other companies have "created browsers" that are just Chromium forks and rubbed Google the wrong way. The intro checklist for Antigravity includes watching VS Code tutorials!

> given how many other companies have "created browsers" that are just Chromium forks and rubbed Google the wrong way

Has there been any indication that these folks are "rubbing Google the wrong way"? I think Chromium, as a project, is actually very happy that more people are using their engine.

Re: Google Antigravity

#669

Post by verdverm »

Man does this thing spam new windows... why spawn new window instead of panels in a single instance?

I have to close 4+ after just a few minutes of poking around

Re: Google Antigravity

#670

Post by tormeh »

therein wrote: post #307
noxa wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 - it also doesn't support remote ssh (the open vsx variant), so is probably only focused at local web design development vibe coding ;( Should have just been an extension with a paid plan.

It also feels like they couldn't use the GOOGLE ANTIGRAVITY logo enough times in this blog post. Gigantic image with the logo and a subtitle, plastered over and over again.

Someone important's career is attached to this project and its logo. And they're making sure it's as visible as possible.
Post reply on HN