This is spot on to my experience vibe coding. You can get pretty good scaffolding but tinkering with details is a nightmare. That is when you need to step in and take over yourself or you will burn all the time saved from the the scaffolding speed up.
I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
431–440 of 483 posts
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#432I wonder if Gemini 3 Pro would do better at this particular test? They're very proud of its spatial awareness and vision abilities.
>They're very proud of its spatial awareness and vision abilities. Suuuuuuuuure they are. I haven't found a single multimodal model, vision LLM, or any model at all that can segment and extract music charts/infographics. Can Gemini 3 Pro, in one shot, turn charts like these into lists of "artist - album" without choking on the visuals? https://reddit.com/r/citypop/comments/10fu1t5/city_pop_album... https://reddit.com…
Might work if you set media resolution to high: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/media-resolution
I tried it on one of the images, how did it do? https://aistudio.google.com/app/prompts?state=%257B%2522ids%...
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#433Just use Playwright Skill ( https://github.com/lackeyjb/playwright-skill ). It is a game changer. Otherwise it is Claude the Blind, as OP mentioned.
But that's cheating because it then has the source code containing the table and its styles. I can confirm that this is what it does. And if you ask it to not use tables, it cleverly uses div with the same layout as the table instead.
I think the idea is to let Claude see iterations of the reproduction with playwright, but still only allow access to screenshots of the original.
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an interesting hypothesis : that LLM are fundamentally unable to produce original code. Do you have papers to back this up ? That was also my reaction when i saw some really crazy accurate comments on some vibe coded piece of code, but i couldn't prove it, and thinking about it now i think my intuition was wrong (ie : LLMs do produce original complex code).
No, the thing needing proof is the novel idea: that LLMs can produce original code.
This just reeks of a lack of understanding of how transformers work. Unlike Markov Chains that can only regurgitate known sequences, transformers can actually make new combinations.
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claude didn't write that code. Someone else did and Claude took that code without credit to the original author(s), adapted it to your use case and then presented it as its own creation to you and you accepted this. If a human did this we probably would have a word for them.
Certainly if a human wrote code that solved this problem, and a second human copied and tweaked it slightly for their use case, we would have a word for them. Would we use the same word if two different humans wrote code that solved two different problems, but one part of each problem was somewhat analogous to a different aspect of a third human's problem, and the third human took inspiration from those parts of both…
> What if it were ten different humans writing ten different-but-related pieces of code, and an eleventh human piecing them together? What if it were 1,000 different humans?
What if it was just a single person? I take it you didn't read any of the code in the ocaml vibe pr that was posted a bit ago? The one where Claude copied non just implementation specifics, but even the copyright headers from a named, specific person.
It's clear that you can have no idea if the magic black box is copying from a single source, or from many.
So your comment boils down to; plagiarism is fine as long as I don't have to think about it. Are you really arguing that's ok?
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#436Wasn't it now (end of 2025) that Dario Amodei said Claude (or LLMs in general) would be doing almost all programming work? This article is my typical experience with LLM coding. Endless correction and handholding, and manual cleanup of subtle mistakes. With no long-term learning from them. Kinda makes me livid, the amount of false hype coming out of the mouths of the stewards of these investor-subsidized LLM companie…
I mean, Claude got 90% there. The author could contribute 10% of work to fix the alignment and have a finished page.
He assembled all the assets, did a bunch of prompting prep, etc. The alignment was kinda the main job, and he would have had to do a bunch of cleanup after. If this was a freelance job a client was paying for, I'd definitely tell myself to save cost next time by not using AI.
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Photoshop drop-shadows on everything.” I just time traveled for a few second there. Thank you for this comment.
Don’t forget to slice it for a 3x3. (And to recreate it all if you want to change your background color…)
Good old 9-slice scaling, I don't miss it for one bit.
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#438Curious if you've tested something such as: - "First, calculate the orbital radius. To do this accurately, measure the average diameter of each planet, p, and the average distance from the center of the image to the outer edge of the planets, x, and calculate the orbital radius r = x - p" - "Next, write a unit test script that we will run that reads the rendered page and confirms that each planet is on the orbital ra…
Hm, I didn't try exactly this, but I probably should! Wrt unit test script, let's take Claude out of the equation, how would you design the unit test? I kept running into either Claude or some library not being capable of consistently identifying planet vs non planet which was hindering Claude's ability to make decisions based on fine detail or "pixel coordinates" if that makes sense.
If I were to do this (and I might give it a try, this is quite an interesting case), I would try to run a detection model on the image, to find bounding boxes for the planets and their associated text. Even a small model running on CPU should be able to do this relatively quickly.
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> They key difference between plagarism and building on someone's work is whether you say, "this based on code by linsey at github.com/socialnorms" or "here, let me write that for you." > [i want to] shake thinking that is profoundly stuck [because they] aren’t able to see past the assumptions they don’t know they making what is profoundly stuck, and what are the assumptions?
That your brain training on all the inputs it sees and creating output is fundamentally more legitimate than a computer doing the same thing.
Copyright isn't some axiom, but to quote wikipedia: "Copyright laws allow products of creative human activities, such as literary and artistic production, to be preferentially exploited and thus incentivized."
It's a tool to incentivse human creative expression.
Thus it's entirely sensible to consider and treat the output from computers and humans differently.
Especially when you consider large differences between computers and humans, such as how trivial it is to create perfect duplicates of computer training.
Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not! We did this in 2024 for our website (1) to have zero CSS. Still works, only Claude can not understand what those tables means. 1. https://www.tirreno.com
Your logo gets cut off in Firefox https://i.ibb.co/kbj5vw7/image.png
I'm on Firefox and when I right click and open image in new tab I see an svg file with pale blue text colour and cut-off lettering. The source of the svg suggests that the letters are drawn paths rather than a font.
Saving the svg file down and loading into Inkscape shows a grouped object with a frame and then letter forms. The letter forms are not fonts but a complete drawn path. So I think the chopping off of the descenders is a deliberate choice (which is fine if that is what's wanted).
The whole page looks narrow and long on my landfill android phone so the content is in the middle third of the browser but can pinch-zoom ok onto each 'cell' or section of text or the graphs.
Thanks to tirreno and reconnecting for posting this interesting page markup.