Hacker News

Yeah, CAD has been my personal example of "oh the barrier to entry for this skill was high enough that I didn't do it and now I can be passably bad at it enough to get some simple things done"

I've had similar experiences with making simple functional parts off a 3d printer with OpenSCAD + LLMs. I'm very aware that the models are worse at it than say, generating react code, and I'm also the antithesis of a skilled pilot. It's still cool and has resulted in me starting to learn a new skill at a hobby level.

Claude does well if you can provide all dimensions. It fails at guessing though. The real magic is when you can provide one dimension or photograph with a ruler in it and the AI will figure the rest out. Right now, Claude anyways, is pretty bad at guessing.

I was recently trying to get models to generate a 3D fortune cookie. Claude in three.js and Gemini in openSCAD. Neither really got the concept or could get very close at all. It's a surprisingly complex shape I guess.

these small functional prints are exactly where OpenSCAD and LLM generation shines

Does it optimize for no support?

Was just going to say.... I looked inside by accident, and it gives a better impression of intelligence and effort than the outside.

I agree, my main concern regarding Google AI products is this endless pain around the UX of login / billing / upgrades / product sunsets... but their LLM models are good and Antigravity 2.0 is not that bad either (unless you lost all you Antigravity 1.0 setup and projects - like many people did)

I've got an AI pro plan and haven't been able to log in for months. Endless checking in with my google support guy. At least Dinesh wishes me good health every week, so that's nice.

I just left the google I/O feeling less confident about google's execution here. - Gemini 3.5 flash is strange. Old cutoff, basically better than 3.1 pro at soem things worse at others, sometimes cheaper, sometimes more expensive than 3.1 pro. - Antigravity had seemed abandoned, and people speculated them cutting it off, and they kind of did migrating everyone to a new antigravity - Google "shipped the org chart" and they have so many AI products and none seem best of breed (e.g. the Gemini integration in google docs is worse than claude)

I was actually hoping for "Opus level intelligence at Haiku costs" model or "Sonnet level performance in Gemini 3.0 pricing", either of these would have been a workhorse, plus a competitor to Claude/Codex (1 app to do things). I got neither.

I just use Claude Code and intellij, so I don't understand why so many people complain about Antigravity ditching VS Code, what's the surface not covered by using Antigravity CLI + VS Code (or any other IDE)?

The forced upgrade from Gemini CLI which I liked as much, and as some ways better than Claude Code was bad. But them just sending out that email on Wednesday that basically said "Thanks for subscribing to Google One AI Pro, as of right now we're adding limits to your account. Tough shit you get nothing." left a REALLY bad taste in my mouth. I had previously praised the "AI Pro" subscription as a good value.

Having my workflow disrupted is the main reason I never adopted Antigravity, despite liking it. I'm glad to see G is invested, but the older I get the more protective I am of my workflow.

Wild that it doesn't cache the creds.

"Pantheon" bloody hell, why is it people writing these articles are so up themselves, it's so overbearing.

Yeah, this is less of a benchmark and more "I like this one guys!".

Just totally subjective grading criteria of a single poorly defined example with no end use case in mind to guide how to even do evaluation.

It is almost comically bad. I've had a few simple parts to design for 3d printing in the last weeks and tried it with them (each are about 4 operations on the timeline), and it never created close to what I was trying to do even if spelled out step by step according to Fusion naming.

At this point I'm not even sure if it can properly create a simple primitive solid.

Have you yet tried the Fusion MCP that was launched last month? https://aps.autodesk.com/blog/bringing-fusion-claude-creativ...

Still a long way to go, but I'm sure it will get there eventually.

"Vase mode snap-fit box" sounds to me like "flexible concrete".

Would you be able to share a bit about your workflow? Have been meaning to try AI gen for game models, and would love to know how people are tackling this.

I've had a positive experience building a library of parametric HVAC duct parts using Claude, Gemini and Codex using build123d (they all review the specs and code collaboratively).

If you have a model that only know how to model CAD but also doesn't know history, and was trained on visual language of said history, how is it supposed to be able to model the Pantheon in the first place? It'd only be able to model exactly what you can describe with text, or even worse, exactly what it'd be able to visually extract from images via the vision encoders, for "vision models", but it'd be a far cry from what you see in this blogpost, would be my guess.

> In future are we going to have same model for everything?

A model that knows more in general, will often be better at specific tasks. e.g. If you ask a model to "make a program that estimates the annual production of a solar installation", it needs to have been trained on a lot more than just Python code.

Look at a picture of the Pantheon, the dome isn't as dome-like as you would imagine. It's more like a hump shape.

Dome looks wrong to me. Look at a few other photos - it's far from being a hemisphere

I'm a googler, opinions are my own.

My take is that it's a fancy wrapper around the CLI tool. It's there to organize multiple conversations and see all the related output and generate files.

I've been using the internal version and I've actually liked it quite a bit. It's clear from when I started using it, it's not an editor, and they have ways to open your normal editor outside of it. They have turned it fully into an agent management tool.

When the antigravity development team doesn't have to focus on all the things that vscode is already good at, it lets them simplify the UI and do only agent related things. We'll see if this bet works out for them, but so far I like the idea.

> I don't think AI coding is a bad thing. [...] it levels the playing field [...]

I'd like to put regional differences aside and say AI coding / LLMs are incredible tools.

While I'm nervous about my job as a programmer being able to pay a prevailing wage after the dust settles, I do hope that everyone gaining access to an AI coder / tutor will allow anyone to be able to achieve things they previously only dreamed of. If the tutor costs pennies per session, sure, the tutors are out of work, but I hope everyone can thus up-skill to work on the challenges they actually want to work on.

I'm taking baby-steps into coding in Elixir on the other monitor, a language I had only read about before, because an LLM is walking me through the changes, answering my questions, and accepting my rebuttals. There's no way I would have time to pick up the language otherwise.

Yesterday I vibe-coded some additions to the static site generator python script for my blog. It was awesome to be able to think in terms of desired features instead of digging around documentation for libraries and syntax.

> AI billing models are fragmented ... IDE is currently tripping over something as trivial ... farce we just witnessed with the antiGravity2.0 update

I'm sorry, but that sounds exactly like almost every single Google "product" out there, they seem to only care about throwing stuff over the wall as quickly as possible, and you'd have a hard time finding a single Google product that doesn't also feel filled with fragmented choices, like every project of theirs have a different project manager every week.

> For East Asians like myself, it levels the playing field with Westerners

Why do you say that? Are there language or cultural disadvantages to being East Asian?

Using reference images is a huge step for this sort of thing. The text-only approaches I've seen before were never going to be that good even with "perfect" AI, simply because describing 3D objects in text is not something that anyone is really any good at.

I remember getting wound up about latency and server issues playing counter-strike in the early '00s. At the same time though, it was hard to justify being angry because playing a multiplayer game with friends who were scattered all over town was something that had to be real magic.

I guess the wow!->adjust->complain->wow!->... cycle is endless as a human

No one asked for faster horses, they still became obsolete when cars came. Nothing new

Things mature, and expectations grow appropriately. That is true of more than just LLM performance.

Welcome to human nature.

Why would you use an LLM for this? They are non deterministic models.

This is also an probably part of extended prompt that disallowed coding, Gemini always does calculation with a little python snippet because it is deterministic and accurate.

Was that part of a bigger prompt?

Flash 3.5 fails exactly like in your sample: https://gemini.google.com/share/97521a8752d9

but Flash 3.1 Lite initially fails, but then corrects itself: https://gemini.google.com/share/dc0889ec85ba

Why should I care if they sunset it? I switch between multiple agentic coding tools on the same projects, sometimes several times per day. The cost of switching is basically zero.

Plenty of google products dont make billions and they are still alive

The normal people are the ones not writing comments, but I'll give you one 'cause you asked:

I'm a Solidworks user. Most Solidworks or other pro CAD users would consider OpenSCAD kind of like MS Paint. Yes, you can draw the Mona Lisa in it, but it doesn't really work the same way.

Even so, the examples shown here are better than what I've seen before. They seem to be on the right track using images instead of long paragraphs of text to try to describe the object. They are still missing the constraints and dimensions that come naturally to pro cad users (it can be done manually in openscad of course), but if you're just making a video game it's probably going to be fine for that.

We are just reading the comments.

"Normal people" probably does not fall in the ballpark of HN target audience.

I'd say its 50/50 pessimistic and optimistic, with pessimistic attracting more attention because of human nature.

> Where are the normal people

Not using OpenSCAD?

Why would a non-tech person be on Hacker News? Isn't the clue in the name?

The people in the middle are still waiting and see , mostly it’s the extremes that are fully vested and loudest on the internet

Both parts seem pretty normal to me.