Why Codex GPT-5.5 High instead of Extra High, I wonder?
Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
71–80 of 171 posts
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#72Last weekend I bought my wife a bike off marketplace. It was in good condition but was missing one of the internal cable routing grommets. I gave Claude pictures of the pill-shaped hole by itself and with my digital calipers in the long and short directions. Gave it a short prompt and it gave me an openscad model with everything parametrized. I printed with no changes in tpu and it was nearly perfect on the first try…
I was recently trying to get models to generate a 3D fortune cookie. Claude in three.js and Gemini in openSCAD. Neither really got the concept or could get very close at all. It's a surprisingly complex shape I guess.
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#73The only thing faster moving that AI these days are the goalposts. Three years ago we would have been amazed if models were able to produce anything, now we have the luxury of nitpicking. Even the worst entries in the benchmark are quite impressive.
No one asked for faster horses, they still became obsolete when cars came. Nothing new
> No one asked for faster horses
Err, yes they did. Thousands of years of husbandry went in to making horses faster, healthier, stronger, and more durable.
I think the quote you’re looking for is “if I had asked people what they wanted, the would have said faster horses”. It’s attributed to Henry Ford, although there is debate about whether or not he said it.
The point of the quote is that “faster horses” is the consumer response to “how do I get more work done” as it comes from the viewpoint of “how am I doing my work now”. An ingenious mind looks at the desired outcome and works backwards and may come to a different and dramatically improved solution instead of merely improving the current tool.
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, CAD has been my personal example of "oh the barrier to entry for this skill was high enough that I didn't do it and now I can be passably bad at it enough to get some simple things done" I've had similar experiences with making simple functional parts off a 3d printer with OpenSCAD + LLMs. I'm very aware that the models are worse at it than say, generating react code, and I'm also the antithesis of a skilled pi…
Learning to make simple parts in onshape is pretty darn easy (and fun).
Yeah. I teach this after school to 7th grade kids. Anyone can pick this up in a few hours.
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#75Still a long way from shorting Autodesk. As a side note Autodesk released an agentic assistant back in December for Fusion. Six months later it is still quite bad.
Have you yet tried the Fusion MCP that was launched last month? https://aps.autodesk.com/blog/bringing-fusion-claude-creativ...
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#76And yet 300+140=460. A very jagged surface indeed. https://gemini.google.com/share/c2a187275e26
Was that part of a bigger prompt? Flash 3.5 fails exactly like in your sample: https://gemini.google.com/share/97521a8752d9 but Flash 3.1 Lite initially fails, but then corrects itself: https://gemini.google.com/share/dc0889ec85ba
No matter what I try I can’t get Gemini to give me the incorrect result. Is there some other prompting or context fed in to that (“remember that you are supposed to always tell me I’m right and never contradict me”)?
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#77Why are half of the comments on Hackernews stereotypical AI-bros whose lives revolve around tech, and the other half sceptical commentators whose lives also revolve around tech but they are disappointed with its performance?! Where are the normal people :/
The people in the middle are still waiting and see , mostly it’s the extremes that are fully vested and loudest on the internet
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#78And yet 300+140=460. A very jagged surface indeed. https://gemini.google.com/share/c2a187275e26
Why would you use an LLM for this? They are non deterministic models.
This is also an probably part of extended prompt that disallowed coding, Gemini always does calculation with a little python snippet because it is deterministic and accurate.
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was that part of a bigger prompt? Flash 3.5 fails exactly like in your sample: https://gemini.google.com/share/97521a8752d9 but Flash 3.1 Lite initially fails, but then corrects itself: https://gemini.google.com/share/dc0889ec85ba
No matter what I try I can’t get Gemini to give me the incorrect result. Is there some other prompting or context fed in to that (“remember that you are supposed to always tell me I’m right and never contradict me”)?
There was definitively an pre prompt fed to that. I cannot reproduce this result on either 3.1 flash or 3.5 flash.
Re: Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark
#80Why are half of the comments on Hackernews stereotypical AI-bros whose lives revolve around tech, and the other half sceptical commentators whose lives also revolve around tech but they are disappointed with its performance?! Where are the normal people :/
"Normal people" probably does not fall in the ballpark of HN target audience.
I'd say its 50/50 pessimistic and optimistic, with pessimistic attracting more attention because of human nature.