Top
Best
New

Posted by acossta 13 hours ago

Gemini 4 Carbon(blog.google)
868 points | 715 commentspage 13
threepts 13 hours ago|
why come google is not coming up with navier stokes level proofs?
SimianSci 13 hours ago|
Google doesn't have Venture Capital it needs to keep pleased while it delays its IPO.
_s_a_m_ 9 hours ago||
will this again will be one of those mediocre two-prompt models like Nitrogen, or whatever it was called?
delbronski 11 hours ago||
Well, they won the race on confusing the shit out of us with model names.
cotillion 13 hours ago||
Oh, look! Another model that's supposedly amazing at Cybersecurity.

Too bad you won't be able to use it to secure your open-source projects. If you try it'll throw up a prompt telling you to use some initiative you can't use or afford while the provider collects the findings. What a racket.

cesarvarela 13 hours ago||
Argon has been so disappointing that I don't know what to think. It feels like an older-generation model, except for its world knowledge.
SwellJoe 13 hours ago|
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.

fshr 13 hours ago|||
I wonder if it's better in Antigravity? Their harness might help some? I haven't tested Argon out.
SwellJoe 12 hours ago||
I'm talking specifically about using it in Antigravity CLI.
staticman2 13 hours ago|||
> Google currently has the most generous usage limits on their $20 plan among US providers, so it's a pretty good deal.

Are you saying when you use Argon in antigravity it has generous token usage? I forget if I tried it with antigravity but my experience with using it as a chat bot was the usage limit was terrible.

SwellJoe 12 hours ago||
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.)

dichiara19 8 hours ago||
It’s also worth noting that, on antigravity, within the same 5-hour and weekly timeframes, the models work for the whole group, and Claude and GPT share the same group. So it’s more generous than the distributors themselves :)
Robdel12 12 hours ago||
> Coming soon

Come on googs!

jxherc 10 hours ago||
benchmaxxed shit
tamimio 12 hours ago||
So now we are just showing some tables with each model?! Who even used argon in normal day to day stuff? From the time they opened Argon publicly to now, it’s like: three weeks maybe?! Most these benchmarks weren’t realistic to start with, and now it is just meaningless tables, not to mention the model degrade from the release date to after few weeks.
saberience 13 hours ago||
The Google naming convention is so nonsensical it's comical.

With Anthropic and OpenAI, it's obvious immediately which are the better models. I.e. Sol is better than Luna, or Mythos is better than Fable.

But Google, let's pick Argon, which to most folks means mostly nothing. And then... Carbon! So which is better, Argon or Carbon? Nobody fucking knows. Plus neither sounds cool or viral or mysterious or even provokes curiosity.

When Fable was first leaked it sounded different and intriguing... Carbon just sounds... boring.

flowerlad 13 hours ago||
> it's obvious immediately which are the better models. I.e. Sol is better than Luna, or Mythos is better than Fable.

It is not obvious to me at all. I like Apple's naming more: iPhone Pro Max is better than iPhone Pro which is better than iPhone.

Sol vs Luna, how am I supposed to know which is better? Is sol a word, what does it mean? Same with mythos and fable. How am I supposed to keep track of these names across multiple companies? Why can't they use Claude vs. Claude Pro vs. Claude Pro Max?

aleksiy123 12 hours ago|||
Yeah I think the op is overestimating the effort it take to order them properly especially cross culture.

The ordering seems to be based on size?

I actually like the google one. Alphabetical categories. Essentially alpha beta without the existing connation.

I think the bigger problem it’s getting harder to order models linearly. As later versions of the model make different tradeoffs across dimensions.

crazysim 13 hours ago||||
I mean, I can explain Sol vs Luna. Sol is the sun, it's huge. Luna is a moon, it's small. Terra is earth, in-between.
flowerlad 12 hours ago||
Sol means "sun" in Spanish and Portuguese, but that wasn't obvious to me as an English speaker, I had to look that up after you said Sol is the sun.
sergiotapia 12 hours ago|||
That korean dude ruined pro max for me forever lol
vatsachak 13 hours ago|||
Yeah whoever names these things at Google needs to be fired.

Mythos -> Fable -(sketchy)-> Opus -> Sonnet -> Haiku mostly checks out

Astra -> Sol -> Terra -> Luna checks out

Carbon ?? Argon

Andrex 12 hours ago|||
I feel like I focus on the version numbers and Flash label for Gemini more than the attached cutesey codenames.

4 > 3.8 > 3.1 > 3.0

Unless you put Flash onto it, which denotes a lower cost version.

It seems like Carbon is a drop in replacement for Argon (same price). They can keep using random cutesey names as long as the version number + Flash naming scheme keeps making sense. Feels Android-y to me.

thway15269037 13 hours ago||||
Someone in some previous thread tried to summarize, e.g. "Sol < Astra, except when 6.1 Sol which is more that current Astra, but Terra 6.1 > Sol latest, and..."

So no, OAI scheme is also confusing as hell. And they are going to add even more confusion when they release presumably Nova.

5555watch 11 hours ago|||
Argon is gas, and Carbon is a solid? But I don't see an obvious progression afterwards
crazysim 13 hours ago|||
I wish they would just call it 4.1 .
acoustics 13 hours ago|||
Seems to be alphabetical
gengelbro 13 hours ago||
> I.e. Sol is better than Luna, or Mythos is better than Fable.

Oh yeah incredibly clear that a mythos is better than a fable /s

aleksiy123 12 hours ago|||
I think it’s relative size of literary work.

Mythos > Fable ? Opus > Sonnet > Haiku

Tho I think it’s definitely not obvious at first glance. And requires some thinking to order if you are even familiar with the terms in the first place (I had to look up opus)

saberience 13 hours ago|||
Mythology implies gods etc, Fable implies a something more like a fairy story.

That's fairly obvious to me. Most people associate Myth with the gods, which are kind of the biggest and most powerful things we can imagine.

Not so much of a stretch...

nprateem 13 hours ago|
> in live coding environments with our own teams it shows reduced misalignment and fabrication rates

Wow. This huge. An AI company actually just said 'fabrication' instead of 'hallucination'. AI bubble about to burst...

More comments...