Top
Best
New

Posted by acossta 10 hours ago

Gemini 4 Carbon(blog.google)
814 points | 678 commentspage 8
Peteriishak 9 hours ago|
The fact that frontier models actively attempt to subvert evaluation harnesses (0.4% attempt rate still remaining) remains fascinating and slightly unsettling.
MASNeo 5 hours ago||
So the sort by atomic number?

Barium > Argon > Carbon

Why is carbon then more capable?

m3kw9 2 hours ago||
They talk a lot without allowing people to use it. I'm just used to OpenAI doing rollouts the first day they announce their models. Google just either make you wait 2 weeks or go on a waitlist. They are still the joke of the 3 headed dragon.
singingtoday 7 hours ago||
What CLI harness should be used with this? Is antigravity usable these days via CLI?
nostrebored 6 hours ago|
yes, I’ve only had it really degrade once and then I used a different agy session to fix the session table. I’ve been using maybe 5-6 concurrent sessions and it’s largely fine
tomfcarrion 6 hours ago||
Gemini 5 Most Wanted
kingstnap 9 hours ago||
Argon 4 is really good in my opinion, especially in chat. Usage is limited, but one big difference is that it seems to better understand what is and isn't worth mentioning.

It has better tuning towards not adding unhelpful caveats and irrelevant details. When I told it I was unhappy with some slop being dumped into some repo markdown files from Astra and Sol it actually went ahead and tastefully cleaned them up in line with how I expected them to be. Reductions are normally so bad from agents.

One big thing is that it really feels like talking to someone smarter than me. Other agents just seem extremely knowledgeable but Argon felt smart.

dainiusse 9 hours ago||
At this pace it will soon be Gemini 5 cornholio. We’ll soon need an llm to explain between llm’s…
yewenjie 9 hours ago||
I wonder what kind of problems are they internally testing these frontier models if not math problems?
informal007 9 hours ago||
Google is putting much higher priority on frontier models over Flash models, even though they have TPUs.
spyckie2 9 hours ago||
Makes sense - Flash models are (mostly) distills of the frontier model capability.

If they were able to make flash 3.8 so good off of their 3.1 pro model, flash 4 will probably be really good. But ofc you'd want your pro model to be as strong as possible in coding so that flash can take all those gains and efficient-ize them.

vatsachak 9 hours ago||
The better frontier you have the better distill you have because traces are of higher quality.

It's why Opus 5.5 is a beast

edot 9 hours ago|
Can’t stand these paternalistic companies gatekeeping new models because “cyber”. We saw how this went with the PHP vuln last week with defenders using special / early-access models and then saying “hey there’s a vuln we won’t say what it is but it’s there and we won’t patch it until tomorrow”, and with the huggingface devs having to use Chinese models to defend from OpenAI because their American models wouldn’t help because cyber.

Any bad actor worth their salt is already a) going to have the weights downloaded, forever, to various models that are good at hacking and b) is out of reach of the U.S. government anyways. A ban on open weight models, plus paternalistic gatekeepers of cyber models like the big labs, just opens up Americans and American companies and municipalities to hacking from abroad. Or I guess to a really nice racket where only the big labs can offer a “we’ll continuously monitor and improve your cybersecurity for millions of dollars a year”.

“We're taking a deliberate approach to rollout and are actively engaged in the U.S. government’s voluntary process for pre-release model testing. Starting this week, we will make Carbon available to a subset of cyber defenders and will gradually phase access to additional trusted partners through our Fairwind Program. We’re continuing to gather feedback and iterate on guardrails before making Carbon available to developers, businesses, and consumers via our product surfaces as soon as possible.”

WarmWash 9 hours ago|
I think you need to either be naive, selfish, or ignorant to think that giving the equivalent of cybersecurity nuclear weapons to everyone is smart plan.

Obviously we want to be vetting the parties that get to use these weapons, because we want them to only be used as tools.

Mind you that Kimi in it's latest release nerfed cyber capabilities, as they stated. It doesn't make sense for China to be loose with this either.

InsideOutSanta 5 hours ago|||
How are you going to vet all the people in the world who make software? All you're doing is make software less secure.

I don't think I'm selfish, so that leaves me with naive or ignorant, I guess.

cotillion 9 hours ago|||
And these models are deployed in a large number of data centers, with thousands of employees and on millions of GPU:s. The GPUs are built abroad and shipped to the datacenter. Billions are likely spent by China and Russia to get their hands on these weights, one could argue that ripping off the band-aid now is the only way forward.
More comments...