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

I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

j0nah.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 483 posts

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#331

Post by OkGoDoIt »

vrighter wrote: post #329

"there is no other way to preserve it" Bullshit. Right click -> view source Or just press ctrl+s and the browser will also gather all the assets into a folder for you. The arrogance of thinking that the only way you know how is the only way.... You literally forgot the save feature all browsers have just because you set out to "solve" this using "ai"

The statement is almost certainly made in jest, since it is obviously untrue. Sometimes adding silly artificial constraints can be a fun way to spark creativity.

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#332

Post by wilsmex »

masswerk wrote: post #136
DocTomoe wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would also render differently on every machine, based on browser settings, screen sizes, and available fonts. Like the web was meant to be. An interpreted hypertext format, not a pixel-perfect brochure for marketing execs.

Hum, table cells provide the max-width and images a min-with, heights are absolute (with table cells spilling over, as with CCS "overflow-y: visible"), aligns and maybe HSPACE and VSPACE attributes do the rest. As long as images heights exceed the effective line-height and there's no visible text, this should render pixel perfect on any browser then in use. In this case, there's also an absolute width set for the ent…

Oh good times, the screen gamma issue got me many times back then, as I was the super odd kid on a Mac in the late 90's (father was in education). I'd pull my beautify crafted table-soup site up on a friends PC later and wonder why all the colors were all wacky!

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#333

Post by raincole »

jacquesm wrote: post #121
thuttinger wrote: post #66

Claude/LLMs in general are still pretty bad at the intricate details of layouts and visual things. There are a lot of problems that are easy to get right for a junior web dev but impossible for an LLM. On the other hand, I was able to write a C program that added gamma color profile support to linux compositors that don't support it (in my case Hyprland) within a few minutes! A - for me - seemingly hard task, which w…

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.

This is why ragebait is chosen as the word of 2025.

> took that code without credit to the original author(s), adapted it to your use case

Aka software engineering.

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#334

Post by cornel_io »

measurablefunc wrote: post #229
jacquesm wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can solve that question in an intuitive way: if human input is not what is driving the output then it would be sufficient to present it with a fraction of the current inputs, say everything up to 1970 and have it generate all of the input data from 1970 onwards as output. If that does not work then the moment you introduce AI you cap their capabilities unless humans continue to create original works to feed the AI…

This is known as the data processing inequality. Non-invertible functions can not create more information than what is available in their inputs: https://blog.blackhc.net/2023/08/sdpi_fsvi/ . Whatever arithmetic operations are involved in laundering the inputs by stripping original sources & references can not lead to novelty that wasn't already available in some combination of the inputs. Neural networks can at best…

Theoretical "proofs" of limitations like this are always unhelpful because they're too broad, and apply just as well to humans as they do to LLMs. The result is true but it doesn't actually apply any limitation that matters.

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#335

Post by insaider »

someguyiguess wrote: post #324
tobyjsullivan wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JavaScript? HTML and HTTP were the real mistakes.

HTML and HTTP? TCP was the real mistake.

"In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#336

Post by checker659 »

bsaul wrote: post #135
jacquesm wrote: post #121

Earlier 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.

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).

I think the burden of proof is on the people making the original claim (that LLMs are indeed spitting out original code).

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#337

Post by retsibsi »

dweekly wrote: post #298
thecr0w wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoops, I'm very dumb. It's Opus 4.1. I updated the blog post and credited you for the correction. Thank you!

That model does not exist. Do you mean Opus 4.5?

> That model does not exist.

It does (unless the previous comment was edited? Currently it says Opus 4.1): https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-4-1. You can see it in the 'more models' list on the main Claude website, or in Claude Console.

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#338

Post by a2128 »

charcircuit wrote: post #260

>I'd like to preserve this website forever and there's no other way to do it besides getting Claude to recreate it from a screenshot. There are other ways such as downloading an archive and the preserving the file in one or more cloud storages. https://archive.is/download/cXI46.zip

The sentence immediately after that would imply sarcasm

> Note: please help, because I'd like to preserve this website forever and there's no other way to do it besides getting Claude to recreate it from a screenshot. Believe me, I'm an engineering manager with a computer science degree. Please please please help (sad emoji)

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#339

Post by DocTomoe »

jeanlucas wrote: post #132
DocTomoe wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would also render differently on every machine, based on browser settings, screen sizes, and available fonts. Like the web was meant to be. An interpreted hypertext format, not a pixel-perfect brochure for marketing execs.

>Like the web was meant to be. what?

Do you not remember the good old days when people who focussed on graphics design rather than content put 'Best used with Netscape/IE5.5' on their pages?

Re: I failed to recreate the 1996 Space Jam website with Claude

#340

Post by testbjjl »

wilsmex wrote: post #328
thecr0w wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, my friend. I added a strike through of the error, a correction, and credited you. I'm keeping it in for now because people have made some good jokes about the mistake in the comments and I want to keep that context.

You bet, Fun post and writeup, took me a bit down memory lane. I built several sites with nested table-based layouts, 1x1 transparent gif files set to strange widths to get layouts to force certain sizes. Little tricks with repeating gradient backgrounds for fancy 'beveled' effects. Under construction GIFs, page counters, GUESTBOOKS!, Photoshop drop-shadows on everything. All the things, fond-times. One or two I have…

“Photoshop drop-shadows on everything.” I just time traveled for a few second there. Thank you for this comment.
Post reply on HN