Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

741–750 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#741

Post by carra »

makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

While this is certainly impressive, I believe it is not a good answer from a user's perspective. Instead of having Claude automatically spend tokens in an unrelated task, I would have preferred it to first tell me: "I can't view the drawing. Would you like me to build a computer vision pipeline to do it"?

Re: Claude Opus 5

#742

Post by maccard »

makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

Imagine if I hired someone to do a cad drawing, and they spent X days/weeks of time building a pipeline to visualise the part instead of asking how can they view the part? We’d call that a complete and utter waste of money and time.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#743

Post by larodi »

sjs382 wrote: post #635
jjcm wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's another test of a cyberpunk ramen shop website. One thing I've found LLMs have a lot of difficulty with is angular cuts / elements that aren't easily representable with CSS. Cyberpunk aesthetics are generally a great test of that, since they have a lot of microglyphs / window decoration. Design source of truth: https://image.non.io/9d5fed20-b476-49d3-841b-37eb553fb88e.we... Opus 5 build: https://html.non.io/ne…

Just leaving this for anyone that says a design like this doesn't work: https://riceboxed.com/

Wish more web looked like this really. Has distinct character.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#744

Post by pms »

anonym00se1 wrote: post #673
zmmmmm wrote: post #670

Pointless anecdote: I asked it to make some slides and it decided to write its own slide rendering engine: > On the format — I dropped reveal.js and wrote a small engine inline instead. Reveal would have meant a CDN load, and a deck that half-renders because the lecture theatre wifi is flaky It one-shotted a perfect functional mini version of powerpoint (or Reveal) for a simple presentation I asked it to make.

Opus 4.8 decided to code up its own version of the SwiftUI rendering engine for iOS when I asked it to change a swipe gesture. I left the computer for several hours, came back, noticed it still wasn't done, noticed it had alarmingly burned through my weekly tokens, and had to stop it from continuing. "You're right. What I did was overkill and I should have just used iOS's built-in rendering engine. Noted for next tim…

That's an "overthinking" model.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#745

Post by [deleted] »

maccard wrote: post #742
makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

Imagine if I hired someone to do a cad drawing, and they spent X days/weeks of time building a pipeline to visualise the part instead of asking how can they view the part? We’d call that a complete and utter waste of money and time.

[deleted]

Re: Claude Opus 5

#746

Post by teacpde »

nicky0 wrote: post #738
teiferer wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline Was it "its own" or something that was part of its training material? Don't get me wrong, I find this all amazing too and makes my work 10x easier and quicker. But it's not like it's inventing this stuff from scratch / first principles. It has seen this kind of tech before by consuming all publicly available source code and books etc. (And that's ok, but let's b…

It would be "its own" in that it's customized for the specific use case. Your same argument could just as easily be applied to humans. If you write your own code, is it really your own, or is it just based on your own training and other code you've seen?

I think their point is that there is no new invention here, being able to mimic what a human will do is absolutely impressive, but at the same time it is still mimicking humans. While I just type that out, I do realize my expectations for AI has been constantly lifted by how fast it iterates.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#747

Post by schnebbau »

brokegrammer wrote: post #710
makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

I don't find it jaw-dropping because the idea is quite simple. Just feed the model an enormous amount of unethically sourced data, build data centers that cause droughts, and use all chips available so that normal people can't afford to buy RAM anymore. We're all sacrificing great things in order to make these models more capable. Whether it'll all be worth it, only time will tell.

> We're all sacrificing great things

Oh please.

> Unethically sourced data

Is that a great sacrifice?

> data centers that cause droughts

That's nonsense.

> normal people can't afford to buy RAM anymore

Lol? Another great sacrifice?

This isn't a healthy or sensible way to think.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#749

Post by Aeolos »

teacpde wrote: post #746
nicky0 wrote: post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be "its own" in that it's customized for the specific use case. Your same argument could just as easily be applied to humans. If you write your own code, is it really your own, or is it just based on your own training and other code you've seen?

I think their point is that there is no new invention here, being able to mimic what a human will do is absolutely impressive, but at the same time it is still mimicking humans. While I just type that out, I do realize my expectations for AI has been constantly lifted by how fast it iterates.

It's mimicking humans only in as far as it is still using tools & programming languages developed by humans, for humans.

This is temporary. There is a future where AI builds tools made by AI for AI, evolving at speeds that we may no longer be able to follow.

Even with our current nascent technology, we can already observe this happening. See the recent laments on the AI Bun rewrite that "it's a million lines of code that nobody has ever reviewed." Or Cursor building a new source-control system for LLMs, because git is designed for human collaboration speed, not hundreds of changes per second.

That's just 4 years in. How much of humanity's code will remain hand-written vs LLM-written 2, 5, 10 years from now?

Re: Claude Opus 5

#750

Post by Matumio »

globular-toast wrote: post #733
zmmmmm wrote: post #670

Pointless anecdote: I asked it to make some slides and it decided to write its own slide rendering engine: > On the format — I dropped reveal.js and wrote a small engine inline instead. Reveal would have meant a CDN load, and a deck that half-renders because the lecture theatre wifi is flaky It one-shotted a perfect functional mini version of powerpoint (or Reveal) for a simple presentation I asked it to make.

That's hilarious. You can totally vendor reveal.js and it works perfectly fine offline. I've done this countless times. Sometimes intelligence means knowing there must be a better way.

It's pretty intelligent not to consider this option unless told directly and go "write your own" by default, but only if you assume that its goal is to make you spend tokens. It shouldn't have let it escalate and get stopped, though.
Post reply on HN