[dead]
Claude Opus 5
751–760 of 1001 posts
Re: Claude Opus 5
#752"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.
What if they spent 15 minutes doing that? Would you care then?
Scale matters a _lot_.
Re: Claude Opus 5
#753"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…
> 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…
> 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 be honest/clear about that.)
But how much to emphasize it, and why?
Because frankly, you aren't inventing anything from scratch / first principles, either. None of us are, not frequently and not much anyway. We're primiarily just regurgitating what we've seen in the past and, mixing it with what we see in front of us - and that's true whether it's art or prose or code.
Here, I wouldn't be able to do the same thing Claude did now, because I've never written a visual ML pipeline before myself. I know enough basics to get me started searching, and I'm confident I'd be able to cobble something together, but it would be me regurgitating and mixing whatever TensorFlow tutorials or OpenCV docs I found relevant, perhaps even tweaking an example from Github.
Now, unless I'd literally just tweak a few lines of config in an existing Github example, no one would begrudge me saying "I wrote my own computer vision pipeline to solve this". So why begrudge LLMs?
Re: Claude Opus 5
#754Earlier 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 in how humans mimick each other in everything they do.
Re: Claude Opus 5
#755Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 is hilarious. "write a program that list files" "Sure! First let's implement a file system, and the operating system around it, and design the hardware that runs it..."
Reminds of a some programmers and researchers I know...
Re: Claude Opus 5
#756Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s what I understand looking at what has been released, but it’s not really clear. The pricing is lower than I expected, I’m wondering what their margin is
By margin you mean how much money they're losing on each request to stay ahead of the curve while investments are still flowing?
I don't know, the CEO of Anthropic has openly said that each model by itself is profitable, they just reinvest everything into training more and more expensive models.
Re: Claude Opus 5
#757Earlier 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.
This isn't mimicking what a human would do, because it is an exceedingly rare human who would write their own renderer for a task needing a CAD file generating. The human who is capable of doing both is rare, let alone the human who can do it in any sort of reasonable time. Saying "but it's in the training data" is a cop-out: it's in Google too, would I do it? No. I would not.
Re: Claude Opus 5
#758Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried making a Things clone yesterday. Spent maybe 7 hours of promoting with Fable. I wanted to get drag and drop right, and I wanted good code architecture to start with. It’s using TinyBase for data storage. Here’s how far I got in 7 hours: https://focuslist.app Yes, much faster than writing all of that by hand. But prompting quality software into existence? No way. It would take at least another full time week t…
A week is fast, no? Would it be faster by hand? 50 hours of work seems like a tiny investment.
Yeah, but I was reacting to idea of "frontend developer career coming to an end".
I guess kinda - the job will change from "frontend developer" to "UI inventor"..
Re: Claude Opus 5
#759"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…
Others have pointed out enough issues such as ethical sourcing, but here’s 2 more:
1) It’s hard to be excited about something that has been promised to destroy your job.
2) New models come out bi-weekly with even more “amazing features”. Eventually you tune out because you can’t be at peak-amazement all the time. Tone down the language a bit…
Re: Claude Opus 5
#760Opus 5 Pelican SVG: https://pelocan.ai/drawings/ese0s599
I still do not understand how models can generate absolutely stunning SVG-like bitmaps of a pelican on a bicycle, but fail to do so when asked to directly create an SVG.
The image linked below was generated as a bitmap by Gemini and then manually converted to an SVG. Why can models not even remotely output something like that as SVG?
