I mean, when I upgraded my pipeline from terra to sol saying "it's the same price basically!" I was excited. Probably would not have felt as excited if it was just a version bump.
Not sure that's why they did it. But that was my experience.
After the cursor aquisition it's become a quite capable coding model. If you take cost into account, it's close to the top. OpenAI is maybe still #1, but I'd put Grok at #2 (again, including cost as a factor).
Codex has become my goto tooling. I used to be a Claude Max subscriber, but I was becoming disappointed with the quality of the output from Opus 5. Fable chewed through my usage too quickly to be practical. Moving to a Pro account w/ Codex was a big improvement. Sol had great output, and the usage was more than sufficient for most of my needs. However astra does tend to chew up usage, so when i've done to much of that, and it's became an issue Grok Build has beocme my second go to account. The output especially after the cursor purhcase has become quite good, and the usage has always been very generous.
I've recently been running these agent sessions on more and more long running tasks because these latest models can do a REALLY good job on big chunks of work, and i've been watching them way less. It's starting to occur to me the importance of alignment is a today problem, it's not a tomorrow problem.
In the past I watched and saw everything the model did, not a lot got past me. Today it does A TON of work while i'm busy on other tasks. It also has extensive access to my computer, other computers on my network, my internet. It's really helpful when you give it a lot of resources, but right now I have very autonomous, very smart agent running around more or less unattended with a lot of resources.
First time this benchmark impressed me - 10/10 I would believe a human spent hours making this. There are details a human would have done better (beak attaching to the head) but still impressive.
Let me know when AI patches this bug in the wheels on all the vehicles on the highway, AND my box fan when it's next to the light with the bad PWM dimming. Then we can resume our existential doom.
I find it interesting that you put the instruction ("animate this") in the system prompt, while the prompt just had the existing SVG and no actual instructions on what to do with it. Anthropic's consumer-facing tools generally don't let you do this, unless maybe you're particularly clever with Claude Code command line flags (you can start Claude Code with a custom system prompt).
Do you think this had a substantial effect on the output?
Sorry, yes, that's what I meant by being "clever with Claude Code command line flags", I guess it's not really that clever. But in general if you just launch Claude Code normally and use it via the interactive CLI, you can't change the system prompt, so most users probably never do it.
I couldn't help myself. Here is the game, one-shot on claude.ai, Opus 5 Extra. There could certainly be play-ability improvements made with 1 or 2 prompts, but neato for one-shot.
"Create a fun and cool game from this" - and pasted the code from above.
Not to be "that" person but it's not solved. The feet are reversed and isn't accurate bird anatomy. In real life, what people think of as bird's feet is actually their toes, and their "knee" is actually their tarsal (ankle bone), and their actual knee is almost hidden in their feathers.
The problem is it's kind of a question without a well defined answer. If it was just drawing a picture of a pelican, we can compare against real pelicans for accuracy. But what exactly is a pelican riding a bike supposed to look like? It's impossible, so liberties have to be taken somewhere.
I agree. Other reasoning traces simonw quoted in his blog post showed that the model made changes to consider realistic fork rake. I think this may also be the first case where the chain went inside the seat stays. The overall bike geometry is still comical but these bits show improvement in this model over prior ones.
On the other hand, given the absurdity of the original prompt, I should not necessarily expect realistic bike geometry.
how about trying to draw an airbus a320 in 3d space using only one brush tool that can be moved to specific x,y,z coordinates (and its color, size & hardness can be changed). i think fable 5.1 did quite a good job (reasoning high, cost $0,261): https://files.catbox.moe/umx102.png
Even at the max dose you will hit a spot where you stop losing weight before you get anywhere near running out of body fat. Some people even go off label stacking two or more or cranking the dose past officially supported levels because they still are overweight.
People honest with themselves will understand that it’s a chronic treatment, you don’t stop.
Calling it now, the downside is the effects are most apparent on higher dosages, but you cant take higher dosages forever. Eventually you run out of body fat, have go reduce the dose, and the benefits dither.
Not sure that's why they did it. But that was my experience.
reply