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

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#771

Post by p1esk »

andypants wrote: post #766
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…

> 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 Surely being able to view the raw pixels counts as viewing the drawing... How else does a computer view a drawing?

I think they meant that Opus 5 had to find and set up a vision model to process the image

Re: Claude Opus 5

#772

Post by password54321 »

p1esk wrote: post #771
andypants wrote: post #766

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Surely being able to view the raw pixels counts as viewing the drawing... How else does a computer view a drawing?

I think they meant that Opus 5 had to find and set up a vision model to process the image

So it probably wrote a Python script using OpenCV? That's not exactly groundbreaking and have seen o3 do this.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#773

Post by lionkor »

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…

Because the step from earlier GPT models to this is not very large? Yes it's impressive they have forced it into learning that it has to get the job done no matter what, which usually means breaking implicit expectations and rules, but then again, Claude is not for people who care.

This isn't groundbreaking in any way. It's cool, but that's about it.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#774

Post by oblio »

alex43578 wrote: post #767
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…

Is anything you do on your own? You wrote this response in English, but didn't invent your own language. How dilute of a contribution can someone/something have made and still merit credit?

LOL. Tolkien invented multiple languages. There are/were probably 100 000 languages on this planet. That's without including dialects.

We use existing languages not because we love to copy, it's because languages are a medium for communication. They're only useful if they're understood by others.

If you wanted to prove a point: writing is much, much harder to invent, yet it was invented independently at least 3 times in history. By definition LLMs can't invent something truly novel like writing. Because nobody trained the first writers. There was no "training set".

It's fine, LLMs can still be useful. Science is looking at the gaps and most of the gaps that are useful are small and LLMs can explore those faster than us. That could potentially improve many lives. Though not in this corporate LLM world, most likely.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#775

Post by chpatrick »

teiferer wrote: post #721
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…

> 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's definitely not seen the counterexample to the Jacobian conjecture before.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#776

Post by lionkor »

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 embarrassing and would have you grilled in any code review, to not even consider to just vendor reveal.js. We have been vendoring dependencies before machine learning was a thing.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#777

Post by vachina »

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…

> not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types of capability improvements?

Because you need a trillion tokens (aka a lot of money) to achieve this. Barring hitting any “safeguards”.

This is a vendor provided benchmark after all.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#778

Post by mstipetic »

vachina wrote: post #777
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…

> not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types of capability improvements? Because you need a trillion tokens (aka a lot of money) to achieve this. Barring hitting any “safeguards”. This is a vendor provided benchmark after all.

Oh come on

Re: Claude Opus 5

#780

Post by adastra22 »

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…

Computer vision != ML pipeline
Post reply on HN