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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Antigravity

#971

Post by [deleted] »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #451
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 We'll fix that, eventually. - don't have career growth that you can feel good about having contributed to Humans are on the verge of building machines that are smarter than we are. I feel pretty goddamned awesome about that. It's what we're supposed to be doing. - don't have a genuine interest in accomplishment or team goals Easy to train for, if it turns out to be necessary. I'd…

[deleted]

Re: Google Antigravity

#972

Post by AstroBen »

anticensor wrote: post #970
AstroBen wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being antisocial isn't an introvert thing. I'm incredibly introverted and still love having time interacting with people

They're asocial, not antisocial. Antisociality is a diagnosable disorder and is known for interpersonal behaviours that are actively against a healthy society. Asociality, on the other hand, just avoids social interactions, not actively harming the society.

Ah, my bad, you're right

I actually checked that before commenting and went off the Google AI overview -.- eugh

Re: Google Antigravity

#973

Post by doiskoh »

thelittleone wrote: post #795
r00tbeer wrote: post #789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first patch release (released on launch day) says: "Messaging to distinguish particular users hitting their user quota limit from all users hitting the global capacity limits." So, collectively we're hitting the quota, its not just your quota. (One would think Google might know how to scale their services on launch day...) The Documentation ( https://antigravity.google/docs/plans ) claims that "Our modeling sugge…

With Ultra I hit that limit in 20 minutes with Gemini 3 low. When the rate limit cleared some hours later, I got one prompt before hitting limit again.

If by "Ultra", you're referring to the Google AI Ultra plan, then I just want to let you know that it doesn't actually take Google AI plans into consideration. It seems like the product will have its own separate subscription. At the moment, everyone is on the same free plan until they finalize their subscription pricing/model (https://antigravity.google/docs/plans).

On a separate note, I think the UX is excellent and the output I've been getting so far are really good. It really does feel like AI-native development. I know asking for a more integrated issue-tracking experience might be expanding the scope too much but that's really the biggest missing feature right now. That and, I don't like the fact that the "Review Changes" doesn't work if you're asking it to modify reports that are not in the current workspace that's open.

Re: Google Antigravity

#975

Post by flux293m »

k1rd wrote: post #275
tnolet wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After using Google AI studio, Google Vertex, and Google Gemini Chat I honestly can't wait to use Google Antigravity! edit: Also Jules... snark off: I think the Google PMs should have coffee together and see if all of this sprawl makes any sense.

you forgot jules

Everybody forgets Jules.

Re: Google Antigravity

#976

Post by theshrike79 »

aniviacat wrote: post #398
nateb2022 wrote: post #43

I went ahead and downloaded it, it looks to be a VSCode fork very similar to Cursor, with support for the following models: - Gemini 3 Pro (High) - Gemini 3 Pro (Low) - Claude Sonnet 4.5 - Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Thinking) - GPT-OSS 120B (Medium)

I wonder why these forks don't build off Eclipse Theia. Is it because of the Eclipse license?

I had the displeasure of using Eclipse in the 2000s Java times. I don't have many fond experiences of it.

We finally discovered IDEA and never looked back.

Re: Google Antigravity

#977

Post by theshrike79 »

troupo wrote: post #574
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.

> I add these files to context as needed. Key words are these. > They then know how to do stuff in the future in my projects. No. No, they don't. Every new session is a blank slate, and you have to feed those markdown files manually to their context.

https://agents.md/

AGENTS.md exists, Codex and Crush support it directly. Copilot, Gemini and Claude have their own variants and their /init commands look at AGENTS.md automatically to initialise the project.

Nobody is feeding aything "manually" to Agents. Only people who think "AI" is a web page do that.

Re: Google Antigravity

#978

Post by theshrike79 »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #443
sorokod wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

Sounds like a junior developer? They can usually write code, but not that well. They have lots of energy and little to say about architecture and style. Don't have a well defined body of knowledge and have no experience. Individual juniors don't change, but the cast members of your junior cohort regularly do.

The problem with AI Agents like Claude is that they write VERY good code and very fast.

But they don't have a grasp for the project's architecture and will reinvent the wheel for feature X even when feature Y has it or there is an internal common library that does it. This is why you need to be the "manager of agents" and stay on top of their work.

Sometimes it's just about hitting ESC and going "waitaminute, why'd you do that?" and sometimes it's about updating the project documentation (AGENTS.md, docs/) with extra information.

Example: I have a project with a system that builds "rules" using a specific interpreter. Every LLM wants to "optimise" it by using a pattern that looks correct, but will in fact break immediately when there's more than one simultaneous user - and I have a unit test that catches it.

I got bored by LLMs trying to optimise the bit wrong, so I added a specific instruction, with reasoning why it shouldn't be attempted and has been tried and failed multiple times. And now they stopped doing it =)

Re: Google Antigravity

#979

Post by theshrike79 »

onion2k wrote: post #745
leoff wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the models are under high load right now, and not working properly.

So the error messaging is wrong, giving the user the impression it's their fault for not paying. I think that's worse..

It's both.

Free tier users get to use what's left over from Google's capacity. They pay with their data, Google uses their inputs for training.

Paid tier users pay with money, Google doesn't use their inputs. They get priority when capacity is running out (like right after a launch as happened here).

Re: Google Antigravity

#980

Post by cmrdporcupine »

senbrow wrote: post #967
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #935

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, that and (also used to work there) the motivations of the implementing teams end up getting very detached from the customer focus and product excellence because of bureaucratic incentives and procedures that reward other things. There's a lot of "shipping the org chart" -- competing internal products, turf wars over who gets to own things, who gets the glory, rather than what's fundamentally best for the custome…

Hah, that exact transition was my last project there before I decided I had had enough! The GPM team was hugely passionate about music and curating a good experience for users, but YT leadership just wanted us to "reuse existing video architecture" to the Nth degree when we merged into the YT org. After literally years of negotiations you got... what YTM is. Many of the original GPM team members left before the trans…

Sounds like we left roughly around the same time and due to similar frustrations.
Post reply on HN