SwellJoe

I think that requires testing, rather than assuming. There's only so far a harness can go.

Bonsai 2-bit quantization is notably dumber than Qwen 27B at eight bits or even four bits. I doubt you'll get this level of quality even with five of them.

"Their kernel orgs are pretty lean"

For years, Red Hat employed more kernel developers than anyone and contributed more. These days they're "only" the fourth largest contributor, after Intel, Google, and Meta, but they are still among the largest corporate contributors.

If that's a lean kernel org, I don't know what a fat one would look like.

I like nearly all of my coworkers, but they're not my friends. I met my friends doing things that don't pay, maybe things that lose money like making music or art.

Yes. For similar tasks using Antigravity+Argon vs. Codex+Astra vs. Claude+Opus, Gemini has the most generous limits on the $20 plan. Since the ChatGPT limits got nerfed last month (or whenever, I can't keep up), the $20 ChatGPT plan is very stingy. With similar tasks I'd see 2x-3x faster consumption using Codex+Astra vs. Antigravity+Argon. I could casually code all day on the $20 Gemini plan, using Argon on Medium, without ever bumping into the limit, which is not true of ChatGPT or Claude $20 plans (but used to be true of ChatGPT). If I were using automated tools and doing a bunch of things at once, I'm sure I could saturate it, but I don't think most humans are very good multitaskers even with agents doing most of the work, so I tend to stay pretty engaged with what's happening and while the agent is working, I'm spending time looking over the previous work, testing, editing docs, etc. I'm not juggling five projects at once, most of the time.

The order of generosity, as it seems to be from my limited testing is currently Gemini->Claude->ChatGPT. (And, if we're including Chinese subscriptions, Kimi is below all of those. Very stingy.)

I'm talking specifically about using it in Antigravity CLI.

I don't like it when unrelated projects squat on the name of some existing project. Trademark isn't just a commercially useful thing, it helps users understand what they're getting and who they're getting it from.

It's shitty for a new project to ride on the coattails of a trusted project with years of reputation. It misleads and confuses folks.

Take inspiration anywhere you like, borrow the code all you like, but don't steal the damned name.

The problem with Argon, that makes it feel like older models to me, is that it stops and waits for confirmations far more often. If run (in a VM or container) in the dangerously skip permissions mode, it gets a lot less annoying. It feels quite smart and thorough, to me, though still lagging Opus 5.5. I'd be fine using it instead of Opus for most things.

This post explicitly says that's been improved in Carbon. So, here's hoping. Google currently has the most generous usage limits on their $20 plan among US providers, so it's a pretty good deal.

That tracks. Fable refuses anything interesting, and Opus from 5 onward also refuses pretty regularly. It's one big reason I have other subscriptions.

I suspect the public model will refuse. Anthropic models have gotten extremely strict on biology and security work.

I'd be happy to be wrong, though. I've never tried to do biology with Claude, but I have gotten many refusals and downgrades for security work.

This is the worst kind of slop. The kind where someone doesn't exhibit any concern for quality or user experience. I know that's so, because it's a gazillion unrelated apps that clone existing huge apps, built by a couple of people and Claude.

The reality of launching a good product with AI is that the coding is very fast, but the QC, the documentation, the refinement and user testing, isn't all that much faster, if you care about it being good.

This is a mountain of code, full of bugs and weirdness that users will be the first to find, because nobody else is looking at it.

My process for building with AI is "intense weekend of vibe coding" and then several times that time spent on refinement and testing that comes from actually using the software a lot. A couple of devs can't be responsible for every major application.

With AI, you can make anything you want, but you can't make everything.

Because society breaks down when there is an elite class of people who are so wealthy the law no longer applies to them, while a significant portion of people are on the brink of being homeless, and many more are one health emergency away from it.

I use Hugo published to Github Pages for my blog. I've never thought about performance (it's Fast Enough™ when I visit it), but I just checked and it's 100 on pagespeed. The magic of a static HTML blog is you don't have to think about performance. An entire category of problem just disappears.

The surveillance capitalists have made it hacker news, by putting their thumb on the scale for fascists.