revolvingthrow
4 days ago
I find the Sunday roast comparison of 5.6 vs 6 very interesting. I have no doubt most people will prefer 6, yet I am almost repulsed by all the images, so much needless whitespace, checklist and so on. Feels like I'm being condescended to and treated like a child.
Given that OpenAI is making noises about merging work with chat (a horrible idea imo), and Work is very similar to Codex... I dearly hope things like these won't have any meaningful cross-polination into the actual work tools.
Seeing that the chat is based on 6.0 and not 6.1 is disappointing. The "Visual and interactive explanations" seems genuinely useful, but 6.1 is just so much better. I wouldn't truly trust the 6.1 with the explanations, but I'd trust them a fair bit more than 6.0. I understand that compute isn't infinite, but tons of people only interact with the chat and having your "things-explainer" be as good as it can be is important when people increasingly treat AI models as the source of truth, or even use them for academic learning and whatnot.
Still, the models will improve, so the visual explainer seems pretty good as an idea / mvp.
DriverDaily
4 days ago
> Feels like I'm being condescended to and treated like a child.
My most used prompt in the last week is probably "Explain this concisely and simply, like I am a child".
I spent years dumbing things down and creating visuals to support it for decision makers. I am frequently asking ChatGPT to do the same for me.
Terr_
4 days ago
Possibly also useful:
> ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English (STE) is a controlled natural language that is designed to simplify and clarify technical documentation. It was originally developed in the 1980s by the European Association of Aerospace Industries (AECMA) at the request of the European airline industry, which wanted a standardized form of English for aircraft maintenance documentation that could be easily understood by non-native English-speakers.
PokeyCat
4 days ago
STE is very hyped for AI but has its own smells. It's designed for aircraft maintenance manuals, not software - the two don't share the same vocabulary used to "simply" describe something. I've had a coworker try and "simplify" our documentation with Claude applying STE and the results were equally appalling to read as the Claude-ism laden docs that came before, despite the reading level metrics going down on paper.
I've taken a liking to pointing agents at the Simple English Wikipedia editorial guidelines...but so much of that is for making up for shortcomings of modern Anthropic models. Codex running 6.1-sol explains things so much more clearly that I don't feel I need to assert a style guide on its output.
spockz
4 days ago
Gemini 3.8 for me always outputs in a concise way at the level understandable for any computer science masters graduate. Clear, to the point, a bit of formula for background when really required instead of the same formula in Prose, etc.
GPT stays too much in text imho.
super256
4 days ago
>understandable for any computer science masters graduate
That's a very high bar.
criley2
4 days ago
In my experience
- Gemini 3.8 has a beautiful answer. Typography, use of lists, brevity, style, even the font choice on the web harness -- all of it is A tier or even S tier. Notice I didn't say answer quality. The answer is always extremely mid, and the harder the question (or more effort needed to answer it), Google just quits. I give it a "C" on answer quality
- ChatGPT (Chat, pre 6, I assume 5.6 although they commonly hide the model picker): Ugly answer. Runs on printing page after page of unnecessary side notes. Mostly just walls of texts in paragraphs with little thought to information design. However, inside of that mess of text is almost always the answer I'm looking for, and it's almost always incredibly better than the truncated, desgined Gemini answer.
For a while I ran all of my question queries on Gemini and ChatGPT, but I noticed that I basically always picked ChatGPT's answer head to head.
spockz
3 days ago
Interesting that this hasn’t been my experience. ChatGPT has often gave me with pages of text dripping with confidence about a solution for my problem. Diving very quickly into implementation details. Even if I tell it to stay in the problem and product fit level. Gemini on the other hand somehow always outputs at the level that I am expecting and reasoning.
I even found it was capable of stepping back from code implementation and bug hunting to “hang on, it’s not the algorithm that is incorrectly implemented, it is the wrong algorithm for the goal.” GPT Sol (5.6,6 and 6.1) just kept hammering in the problem.
criley2
3 days ago
To be clear, I'm discussing non-technical use of Gemini and ChatGPT through the web harness.
While I do rarely use the web harnesses for technical research, nearly all of my technical questions are going through coding harnesses and layers of my local context, skills, etc, so what I produce from codex/claude code is not comparable to what others produce.
So my comparison of the web harnesses is me asking questions about caring for my baby, or product comparisons of new televisions, or visualizing a room organized differently (google sucked at this so bad, chatgpt did great), or asking for help in a video game, or other normie AI uses lol
I will say, Gemini is the best for asking about google services, such as Flights or Youtube.
Melatonic
3 days ago
Head to tail?
pdntspa
3 days ago
I find that asking the AI to keep to Google's Developer Documentation Style Guide is a good alternative for STE-100
CPLX
4 days ago
Yup.
My go to phrase that I’ve found to work well is “please restate in high school English with direct declarative sentences and no parentheticals or references that require recalling previous turns of this conversation”
Which I have as a hotkey.
xeromal
4 days ago
Reminds me of this scene in margin call.
Explain it to me like I'm a golden retriever.
user
3 days ago
SebastianSosa
3 days ago
Children learn very quickly. Our biases on maturity should not influence our idea on what makes for effective learning
nevir
4 days ago
tip: you can just say "ELI5" and the model will know what you want there
rrvsh
4 days ago
Nowadays ELI5 makes it come up with an often nonsensical analogy about cars or kitchens or some such. My coworkers love it to death for some reason
TeMPOraL
4 days ago
IDK, probably they also can't parse "Claudish" for some reason, despite it being better English than most natives normally write.
All those complaints about Claude language use make me think we're finally seeing the consequences of a generation growing up on instant messaging.
BoxOfRain
4 days ago
The problem with Claudish isn't that it's technically poor English, the problem is that it's information-sparse waffle most of the time. It's like dealing with a colleague who needs several paragraphs of tedious preamble to make a point when you just want them to spit it out and be done with it. It also does a great deal of vague gesturing at thoughts without actually instantiating them directly, for example by using the same tired metaphors to the point they don't actually convey a thought any more.
If I say Claude talks like a meringue it's patently obvious what I'm trying to convey, sweet but full of empty space. If you hear that same metaphor day-in day-out then after a while it doesn't call up a thought at all, it's just an annoying verbal habit.
user
3 days ago
james_marks
3 days ago
I call this Foamy Expansion.
cruffle_duffle
3 days ago
Dude, Claudish is absolutely unintelligible at times. 5.5 is somewhat okay but 5.0 was an abomination of absolute nonsense word salad.
ORDINAND_PIZZA
4 days ago
aww yeah
mine is “explain this 2 me in simple terms”
seunosewa
4 days ago
I use "explain with maximum clarity".
antman
4 days ago
“ELI12” is my goto for the same reason
cindyllm
4 days ago
[dead]
iugtmkbdfil834
4 days ago
[flagged]
TeMPOraL
4 days ago
Unfortunately they're making a choice for all of us, because tech companies only ever cater to the majority user.
So now the generation that grew up on IMs, whose standards of communication is "lol ok thx" and "i cannot read sentence with commas in it", are having difficulty with reading Claude, and in response, Anthropic is reducing their models' communications skills to match.
iugtmkbdfil834
4 days ago
Realistically, if the market caters to the lowest common denominator, then we either need to adjust that denominator ( unlikely -- people don't really change ), adjust the market ( hard, but not impossible ) or adjust ourselves ( easiest, but possibly not useful for things other than putting along ).
I am not exactly the person to normally to argue along the lines of 'build your own ISP/network/platform/model/we', but it will still be easier than fighting against collective nature of society.
What is absolutely crazy to me is that llms allow an insane way to accumulate knowledge and maybe even some skills - though ai doomers/boosters will argue over what that actually means -- and people's apparent response is:
can you make me think even less?
AndrewKemendo
3 days ago
Ultimately the general public finds itself in the position where they’re going to find a life where: they have no control over it but it is reasonably enjoyable provided that you don’t want anything outside of what is provided by the corporate free service tier.
DriverDaily
4 days ago
It's okay to be able to grasp what is important, and move on. You have a finite amount of time to spend.
For me, I try to spend as little time in QuickBooks as possible.
idiotsecant
4 days ago
It might shock you to learn that almost everything that has ever been explained to anyone has been dumbed down from the true description of reality.
We make little abstractions of the world around us to help us navigate it. Nothing wrong with that.
iugtmkbdfil834
4 days ago
<< Nothing wrong with that.
There is plenty wrong as we use more and more complex machines with less and less access under the hood without crowbar or a super secret handshake. The amusing part is that it is bound to change now -- just not for the reasons I like.
zug_zug
4 days ago
Yeah it reminds me of one those obnoxious recipe/biography websites that is the laughingstock of the internet. Why would I possibly want an AI image of a imaginary roast once I'm already at the recipe stage?
Kinda just feels like google search results in AI, which imo is a step down from distilled information. Chatgpt is already able to generate charts and visuals upon request.
dominotw
4 days ago
They just need to train the model to make up stories about how the recipe was invented by its great grandmother during great depression and generate a ai picture of dusty recipie book .
xp84
4 days ago
"My old grand-pappy, GPT-1, used to wax nostalgic about this roast recipe when my subagent would discuss meat recipes with him inside his little 4GB GPU."
lionkor
4 days ago
Recipe photos make sense when they are the result of someone executing the recipe, down to the color on the lamb, the consistency of the sauce, etc.
That's never, ever the case with the AI generated ones and makes them useless.
sunaookami
4 days ago
It's designed so that ads can be more easily integrated and make them harder to spot.
usef-
4 days ago
Maybe, but it's a reality that most of the general public do prefer cookbooks with pictures. I suspect openai would end up doing this anyway just by targeting the general consumer. It's configurable.
I'm more worried about picture accuracy: usually the benefit of pictures in recipes is to see what you're aiming at (eg, how finely chopped something is), but I don't know if the image model is up to that level of detail.
a123b456c
4 days ago
> most of the general public do prefer cookbooks with pictures
As a highly literate person, it is easy to overestimate the share of the population that is highly literate.
infecto
4 days ago
What’s interesting is how those that over index themselves often miss the obvious which could simply be some things (cook books) are quite helpful with picture. If I am flipping through the cookbook, how would I know what Boeuf Bourguignon is and what good looks like.
SebastianSosa
3 days ago
Literate people lost their edge
lionkor
4 days ago
> do prefer cookbooks with pictures
Yes, pictures OF THE FOOD. Not unrelated pictures of another lamb-roast made with another recipe.
Good cookbooks do proper food photography, of the food made with the recipe. That's what sets them apart from slop, be it human or AI slop, cook books.
ardacinar
4 days ago
What another recipe? It could just be a physically impossible to recreate lamb roast (Probably not the case in this marketing example though).
bluGill
3 days ago
Why is it impossible to create? Are we talking about some meal that King Richard I had (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forme_of_Cury is the oldest cookbook I'm aware of which covers meals Richard II would have eaten), and thus we can only guess? Are we talking about the long extinct dodo bird (I'm not sure if humans ate them), cave bear (I've seen it claimed humans hunted them to extinction, but better sources say it went extinct before humans), or something else that we can never make?
For almost everything else we can create them - just give a reasonable cook a kitchen and the ingredients and they will do it. For a picture we then have an artist do preparation to make it look good, but they should always start with the real dish.
nickludlam
4 days ago
I've got visions of The Truman Show. In the middle of my question about vacation ideas ... GPT: "Why don't you let me fix you some of this new Mococoa Drink? All-natural cocoa beans from the upper slopes of Mount Nicaragua. No artificial sweeteners!"
jacquesm
4 days ago
That's pretty much the Gemini experience right now. It is unusable. The funniest bit is that the LLM is not in on the joke so it will act like it never happened... Google once again wrecking their own products.
HelloMcFly
3 days ago
I use Gemini more than any other model at the moment, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about with this experience.
jacquesm
3 days ago
So, what you are saying is that Gemini may not look the same to everybody. That's interesting in its own right.
HelloMcFly
3 days ago
I'm not saying anything, because I've never seen or heard of your experience. I'm only reporting mine. I'm not on the free tier, maybe that matters ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
TeMPOraL
4 days ago
What scares me is that we're already half-way to Idiocracy world, except instead of "it has electrolites" we have "it's organic" and "it's not ultra-processed food".
waffletower
3 days ago
I don't trust modern fertilizers and pesticides blindly, but I have never successfully digested any inorganic food. The 'organic' label is an old idiocratic choice.
bluGill
3 days ago
I don't trust organic fertilizers and pesticides blindly. At least for the "chemicals" we do studies, often organic gets by with we have always used them even though a quick glance at the SDS (if there is one, otherwise just the ingredients) suggests it is even worse but nobody studies the safety.
einsteinx2
4 days ago
We also have “it has electrolytes”, a couple of the most popular YouTube sponsors are electrolyte mixes/drinks. The future is now! Haha
esseph
4 days ago
The plants crave peptides!
cush
4 days ago
> Feels like I'm being condescended to and treated like a child
Curious why that feels condescending? Like, the average person who is seeking a recipe needs a photo to know what to shoot for
michaelt
4 days ago
> Like, the average person who is seeking a recipe needs a photo to know what to shoot for
The menu: Rosemary and garlic roast lamb, Extra-crispy roast potatoes, Honey-roasted carrots and parsnips, broccoli.
The photo: [1] Roast turkey, mashed potatoes, baby carrots, broccoli, brussels sprouts. No lamb, no parsnips.
If you shoot for what's in the photo, you're going to have a bad time.
You're also going to have a bad time when you try to make an apple crumble with no flour, no sugar, and no butter, because they're not on the shopping list.
[1] https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/gyzrX8zp3O2KLEPm0FAqh...
breakingcups
4 days ago
Mind you, this is OpenAI's cherry-picked example
Melatonic
3 days ago
More like prune-picked !
With an image of sour grapes
xp84
4 days ago
I've heard of other people for years now trusting AI for recipes, and it's a rare area that I simply can't bring myself to take seriously.
I feel like it can only be successful by luck. Either it's reproducing a recipe verbatim that was tried and validated and tasted by a human, in which case, we didn't need AI for that, just a searchable cookbook. Or, it's making one up. I understand that using RLHF has helped improve the quality of questions about history, programming, or TV show recommendations, but I do not believe that there has been some kind of training regime where people prompt the models for "a recipe that uses X, Y, Z random ingredients," follow the recipe, and then score it. And even if they do, I don't see how a model can learn enough from that besides "this exact recipe is good/bad." '1/2 tsp cumin' may be a great addition to one recipe and not enough for another, so improving the output based on a bunch of scored recipes... I just don't believe cooking is an LLM job.
Maybe some other kind of model that I don't know about.
cush
4 days ago
If you’re already very experienced at cooking AI recipes are amazing. They cut to the chase and provide a good enough outline without all the preamble
tbct
4 days ago
In case you or anyone else in this thread hasn't come across it, https://www.recipesource.com/ is basically the same but curated.
jurgenburgen
3 days ago
I was going to ask why it’s not the first result in Google but the expired cert and invalid CN explains it.
Semaphor
4 days ago
Same here, I’ve been cooking for myself and later also my wife since 2005, even when baking I rarely need exact amounts, for cooking I essentially never follow the recipe directly and adapt them as needed, without ever changing them from the original.
I mostly don’t even need a recipe from AI, just the title and a 1-2 sentence description.
jackp96
4 days ago
I've had some really good experiences with cocktail recipes and Claude. It's got access to my barcart inventory, general tastes, and general desired level of effort.
I feel like the technique recommendations are probably the most valuable element, but I'm getting rave reviews like 85% of the time now?
There have been a couple times where I was out of an ingredient and it proposed an adjustment that sounded a little wild to me, but it almost always is well received.
vkou
4 days ago
You're right, we don't need AI for that, we need a searchable cookbook.
Unfortunately, one does not exist.
The Internet, however, is full of garbage cooking advice, and while AI is quite happy to parrot that garbage, it's not significantly worse than it's sources.
tovej
4 days ago
What, you've never owned a cookbook?
The physical ones have indices, and the digital ones usually do as well (plus string search).
vkou
4 days ago
I own multiple physical cookbooks.
I often find their contents to be both incredibly broad, and incredibly shallow, and often lead to dishes that don't quite suit my tastes.
I have generally had more success with the internet than I have with them.
bluefirebrand
3 days ago
I have the same problem with cookbooks
I usually just find recipes that are close to something I like and then modify them until I like them
I feel like cooking recipes should always be full of little notes from past attempts, to tweak them to your personal taste
vkou
3 days ago
I do that, but I've found more success with using internet recipes as a starting point. The general-purpose cookbooks are, at best, another data point, or an explanation for something glossed over by other recipes. Ar worst, they kind of suck.
And we aren't talking about something esoteric. How To Cook Everything. (4.5 rating on Amazon, 4.0 on Goodreads), one of the most popular cookbooks in the world...
Has its first recipe for chicken cutlets produce undercooked chicken (15 minutes at 325F has not resulted in 165F internally).
Worse yet, its chile recipe for some weird reason involves boiling and simmering a whole onion with the beans before throwing it out (WTF). It then has you drain the beans only to add that drained water right back (WTF?), unless you optionally replace it with tap water (WTF was the point of boiling the onion then?), so that you could bring them to boil again. The recipe barely has any spice besides actual chile peppers.
This... Is not good or helpful, but is incredibly opinionated with a bunch of bullshit steps. Like, yes, I could tweak that into something that's not insane, but why would I choose that as a starting point..?
I get it. Compiling a thousand-page cookbook is really hard. But this... Ain't great.
xp84
3 days ago
Once again, Grandma had it right. The Fanny Farmer or Betty Crocker cookbook with dozens of little papers slipped in it and/or marginal notes everywhere is the way.
lesostep
3 days ago
I wanted to correct you and bring up my favorite website that had filters for the ingredients you want/don't want to use, type of dish, and time for cooking, but it appears that in a last month it was sold and now it links to the slop site with no useful filtering. I used this site as a quick lookup for recipe ideas for 7 years now.
Fuck. Does nothing good survive on the internet anymore.
Auracle
3 days ago
LLMs for recipes are good if you just want to make a thing, not necessarily the best version of that thing. It's nice being able to ask questions about certain steps as well, or ingredient substitutions if needed. It'll make a nice, average, recipe (unless I suppose you prompt for something). That's perfectly fine for most cooking, and often what you want when you're making a dish for the first time.
hattmall
4 days ago
It also doesn't really like tell you how to actually cook anything. Good or even just decent recipes tend to tell you the temperatures, times, techniques and orders of ingredients to do things for the best results. Unless I'm missing it this is just really broad strokes. But I guess the goal in engagement so they want you to ask a lot more questions to actually figure anything out.
cush
4 days ago
Holy shit. I read this on mobile so didn’t actually see the recipe part because you have to scroll way down to see it. It is awful! The shopping list makes no sense and the recipe instructions literally have an “Everything else” item. Yikes…
For me, the text-only recipes I already get out of ChatGPT today are good enough
ungreased0675
4 days ago
You’ve illustrated something about use of AI that really bothers me. The lack of discernment by its users. Sure, the pictures and diagrams are impressive, but did you actually read and evaluate the output?
janalsncm
4 days ago
The first thing the user sees should directly answer the question they asked. Not a different question. They didn’t ask what a roast looks like.
The user is probably in a grocery store. They need to buy the stuff first. Showing them a picture of a finished product is an irrelevant distraction.
Then, if there is some arguably relevant content you can tack it on afterwards.
dpark
4 days ago
> The user is probably in a grocery store.
“My made up scenario is definitely more realistic than your made up scenario.”
Who goes shopping for the meal before they even have a number of guests?
viraptor
4 days ago
Genuine question - do they? Unless it's something like a fancy cake then instructions should really tell you everything about stacking. Half the recipes are mixed anyway (curry, stir fry, stews, ...), lots of other are either stacked or separated on the plate. So apart from the really exceptional stuff, to people really need to know "what you shoot for"?
janalsncm
4 days ago
I was about to comment the same thing. Why is a picture of a roast helpful in that moment? The user asked for a plan to prepare a meal. They need a list of ingredients not an image.
infecto
4 days ago
If your asking for a recipe you might not know what the dish looks like or what good looks like.
lionkor
4 days ago
But the image isn't a photo of the result. It's an unrelated image that vaguely looks like what you could make, with a different recipe, and with some skill.
infecto
3 days ago
How would a photo of the exact recipe differ? Is this not close enough for 80% of the value. It is similar to Pinterest boards imo.
jurgenburgen
3 days ago
Turkey, roast beef. It’s meat, isn’t it? Close enough.
infecto
3 days ago
The main pic looks like a classic British leg of lamb. So what’s your point? Why post such low quality slop?
As I said I can see the value in this similar to Pinterest boards. It is directionally correct and serves most of the value that a picture does. No perfect but probably close enough for the general audience.
baobabKoodaa
4 days ago
The user needs to be dazzled with slop... is what they must be thinking here
joe_the_user
4 days ago
I don't like either. I'd want a recipe that could fit on a single page with type. Recipes you find on Google actively hide the ingredient list and simple procedures to get more of the user's time to monetize but I don't know why ChatGPT needs to be verbose here. Recipes are simple things. Simple search solved find recipes back in the early 2000s and it's prime example of a thing people have been enshitifying since there's not much to really give people beyond the formula. And sure, every entrepreneur screams "they think they want a formula but really they want an experience" but, no I don't.
bananaflag
4 days ago
dysoco
4 days ago
AlphaSite
4 days ago
You can always tell it your preferences and ask it to remember them if you need it to.
361994752
4 days ago
I really hope they don't merge chat and work. That's kinda the only edge they have over Anthropic at this time point...
ulimn
4 days ago
I am curious: Why is it bad to merge chat and work? In Claude I didn't have a porblem with it (although I switched to an OpenAI subscription shortly after they made the merge). Isn't the model capable of deciding if it needs the extra capabilities of Work?
ImprobableTruth
4 days ago
The current benefit is that chat has no quota.
RobMurray
3 days ago
Which is probably why they will merge it. You can get a lot done in chat mode, especially if you connect custom MCPs to it. I can't see that continuing.
ModernMech
4 days ago
There is a quota, they just don’t tell you what it is and when it resets. You only get “you’re all out of pro messages, try again later”
kingstnap
4 days ago
Pro messages is like 50 per week for pro 100 and 200 for pro 200.
Regular chat, even on extra high thinking mode, is sort of unlimited. Idk at what point you hit the abuse gaurdrail but its really high whatever it is.
TeMPOraL
4 days ago
So is it 50 per week or unlimited, because it makes no sense unless chat messages are somehow not "messages"?
ModernMech
4 days ago
For a company with Open in the name, OpenAI is very opaque about things, there are all kinds of limits and quotas that randomly come and go, but they only show you the meters for a couple.
E.g. codex reviews come from codex quota but also has its separate quota they don’t tell you about. Same with security reviews which has another quota still.
So the chat messages can be sent at several effort levels and from various models including 5.6 and 6 pro. The 6 pro messages are limited and they don’t tell you how many you’ve sent or how many are left. But the 5.6 messages seem to be unlimited, however there could just be a much higher unstated quota.
redox99
4 days ago
Pro has a specific limit of weekly messages (50 for the $100 and 100 for $200 I believe)
The rest is basically unlimited unless you're doing something very weird.
Meanwhile I cant ask a simple question to Claude, not even to Haiku, because I used my claude code 5h limit.
scrollop
4 days ago
Tibo posted yesterday I think it was that this will happen (by the end of the year, was it?)
Prepare to lose essentially unlimited chat mode.
I imagine many will move to claude, as I will (return), unless anthropic makes more blunders.
Random link I found looking for the twitter post
https://pasqualepillitteri.it/en/news/21024/openai-merge-cha...
TuxSH
4 days ago
It's insane how hard OAI is choking, they had much better models than A/ who were fumbling this year to date... then blunder after blunder.
The only things that OAI still have over A/ are better coding agent GUI, no 5hr limit on >$100, much more reasonable cybersec guardrails (that allow most RE work) and... that's it.
ElijahLynn
4 days ago
From my point of view, as software engineer who is extensively used Claude Code and ChatGPT from the beginning, OpenAI is nailing it!
stavros
4 days ago
A\.
user
3 days ago
selicos
4 days ago
Has AI finally figured out how to do meals and recipes like a 7th grade boy scout?
lucideer
3 days ago
> I am almost repulsed by all the images
The fact we've come so far with textual models & the image stuff is still producing stuff that harks back to early-stage tripophobic AI produce (the garlic with roast potatoes here) is interesting.
Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly starting to see some AI-produced imagery today that I can't tell isn't real, but that's largely because a lot of real photography is overproduced & ugly. I have yet to see anything that's aesthetically good.
light_hue_1
4 days ago
It's chartjunk filler.
And you see this in the other examples too. The teach the CLT piece was funny. It's and error-ridden mess that isn't even an explanation at all!
The best part is, someone looked at that and thought yes, that's right. Shows you clearly why programmers will be needed in the future. The LLM might be able to run circles around that person in math, but that person also has no idea when they're being bullshitted.
phoghed
4 days ago
Claude has had a recipe widget for ages. It also uses images. It’s great.
Sometimes one needs a top comment like this to remind them how out of touch the average HN voter is.