Top
Best
New

Posted by dvaplima 6 hours ago

Gemini 4 Hydrogen(blog.google)
442 points | 285 commentspage 5
theplumber 6 hours ago|
So a pretty mediocre model at best on par with the open Chinese models. At least the Chinese models have a coherent naming
iamdelirium 6 hours ago|
By what metric?
lbarrow 5 hours ago||
The naming of this stuff is so bad. Hydrogen (1) is dumber than Carbon (6), sure. But Carbon (6) is smarter than Argon (18)!

The labs use a pretty clear progression: Luna -> Terra -> Sol -> Astra; Haiku -> Sonnet -> Opus -> Fable/Mythos. Google doesn't make it easy.

forgotpwd16 5 hours ago||
Claude is the same really. Fable is a short story, so makes no sense in this hierarchy, and Opus have to think it as derived from "Magnum Opus" to make sense, else Opus by itself simply is a piece of music by a composer and would've been more appropriate for low-reasoning model to be used by sub-agents.
vrosas 4 hours ago||
Anthropic, OpenAI and literally everyone else's naming schemes are in the same class of silly. The regurgitated complaints on every single thread are really getting tired.
217 5 hours ago||
The era of "ai le bad" jokes might just be over

Billions of people will now be exposed to a model that crushes sonnet 5.5 on benchmarks (in google ai search suggestions).

I kinda miss dumb ai in a way actually, was a certain charm to it

rbobby 4 hours ago||
Hydrogen... the smallest atom that can still call itself an atom... and they've named their model after it?

I do not understand ai marketing.

dainiusse 5 hours ago||
Next will be gemini 4 cornholio if they keep following this naming
npn 5 hours ago||
looking as the price, seems like google wants to share the AI bowl with other companies, so generous!

though I suspect they keep the price this high to increase the profit margin for the shortened release cycle (instead of 6 months I think they will release newer checkpoints in 3 months or less from now on).

still, my application now permanently use deepseek models instead. no point using gemini, neglectable real life improvements for extremely higher price.

onlyrealcuzzo 6 hours ago||
Pretty big Gemini fan, but my initial results with Hydrogen and Carbon are disappointing.

They are trading improvements on pass@1 pointless benchmarks for worse disasters at p90/99 that you're going to hit every week in agentic workflows (if not daily):

overreach (doing more than asked), overwork (when it should have failed fast), harm (doing the opposite of what was asked), orthogonal work (doing something completely unrelated to what was asked), etc.

Google doesn't seem to be the only lab making this trade...

The set of benchmarks they released are disappointing. 10 mostly random benchmarks. Really?

ComputerGuru 6 hours ago|
No one on HN seems to get that agentic workflows are not the only name in the game. Everyone doing agentic development is either on a plan or with a custom enterprise offering, either way using higher-performing models. These entry level models are (also) for building apps on top of while you are paying API prices.
maxglute 4 hours ago||
There was this almost peaceful time few days where antigraivty drop down menu was

argon

flash

opus

sonnet

now its

argon

hydrogen

flash

opus

sonnet

gptoss (i swear ths was removed earlier)

carbon

oh ahd hydrogen has 4th extra thinking.

holy shit just route this shit for me..

E: or not

This service has been disabled in this account for violation of Terms of Service. Please submit an appeal to continue using this product.

Haven't done anything, worked fine before update, now after. And lol where is even appeal form. Right after I said Google One was good value.

zetazzed 6 hours ago|
Terrible naming convention on the low-end, because what do you do if you make something smaller than Hydrogen next? Gemini 5 Electron?

On the high-end, I feel like there is an implicit promise that if they keep releasing larger models and go past Oganesson (118), they are on the hook for AI-discovering a new stable element, so that is fair at least.

Havoc 2 hours ago|
Just do the same as other products...after a couple years you wrap round back to the original naming because by then people have forgotten it
More comments...