RayVR

what a heavy, poorly performing site. my fairly powerful macbook pro struggles on that site.

Then, of course, there's the fact that all of the start and access buttons just open the same page in a new tab.

I’m constantly disappointed by Anthropic’s models.

I become more disillusioned every day.

It seems like, by having the models write Python code, they tend to write Python code like an average developer. Which is to say, quite bad.

Add in the complete failure of the models to adhere to instructions in Claude.md, memory files, and added multiple times in prompts, I’m wasting huge amounts of time fixing bad design decisions that the model just slips in.

This is different from the Mouser open source app for Logitech?

My own experience is that with the best models, if you provide reasonable tools, with progressive discovery, and a semi-clear user request, the system prompt is essentially worthless.

Yes, this is already accounted for in many benchmarks, but without deep context of the problem type, the top line pricing is the best starting point.

In my own experience, Fable is more token efficient than opus 4.8 with a higher likelihood of completing tasks correctly or at least with minimal corrective work. Opus regularly struggled to gather the correct context and reason effectively about what it had gathered.

GPT-5.6-sol crushes fable in speed and token efficiency and is clearly superior across many tasks that matter for me.

I also find all models from anthropic after opus 4.6 to suffer from the same ai slop language that long plagued OpenAI and seems to have been reduced drastically in 5.6

Non-competes in finance almost always come with compensation during the defined period.

The idea that a company can restrict at-will employee’s post-separation employment is absurd if they aren’t compensating the individual.

In many US states and countries outside the US, the enforcement of non-competes is very very hard. The problem is that they create a RISK of enforcement.

I gave fable 5 a task for which opus has been really really underperforming. Fable 5 took far less time and produced actually useful analysis. Instead of just regurgitating roughly what the code already does or misunderstanding entirely, it identified multiple routes to improve. Now, the code it is analyzing is not very good as it was mostly produced by opus.

Opus had consistently ignored my instructions and looped on broken logic over the last several weeks.

I’ll be sad when this model is removed from Claude code because I won’t be paying api pricing to work on open source projects.

I have been using opus 4.8 all morning and this is honestly the most sycophantic, ChatGPT like experience I have had from Anthropic. Very concerning.

My own experience has been that it works for about five minutes before it just disconnects or hangs. I’ve never been able to use it successfully.

My first experience with 5.5 via ChatGPT was immensely disappointing. It was a massive reduction in quality compared to 5.4, which already had issues.

As with anything, it depends on the quality and skills of the people doing the designing. I have yet to really work with a designer that embedded themselves enough in the UX to design anything I thought was good.

Granted, I have not worked with that many designers so it’s maybe small N problem.

The gap between figma and where our front end teams work and design is still too large.

I think the more likely result of this is fewer designers and more work for developers with some design skills.

Who cares?

I used Claude code to build a custom notes application for my specific requirements.

It’s not perfect, but I barely invested 10 hours in it and it does almost everything I could have asked for, plus some really cool stuff that mostly just works after one iteration. I’ll probably open source the code at some point, and I fully expect the project to have less than two stars.

Still, I have my application.

For anyone that’s interested in taking a look, my terrible landing page is at rayvroberts.com

Auto updates don’t work quite right just yet. You have to manually close the app after the update downloads, because it is still sandboxed from when I planned to distribute via the Mac App Store. Rejected in review because users bring their own Claude key.

These bear related sayings always make me laugh. The one I was told by a Russian: “don’t argue over how to skin the bear before you’ve killed it”

That’s hilarious

This is powerful. You’re finally saying the quiet part out loud.

/s

Did you read the article? Author is talking about humans relying on chatbots to formulate all their responses for them without strict direction and refinement.

I'm sorry, but the music on the demo video is the most atrocious nonsense. I know it's crazy, but it makes me hate the app. openAI is falling off hard.

I have often found proton’s intrusive marketing campaigns annoying.

I use them for email and that’s all I want. Every time they market some new product to me, I get closer to moving to a new provider.

Every time I open threads it’s mostly ChatGPT garbage from wannabe tech or finance influencers.

I think the key thing here is in point 2.

I’ve wanted a good markdown editor with automatic synchronization. I used to used inkdrop. Which I stopped using when the developer/owner raised the price to $120/year.

In a couple hours with Claude code, I built a replacement that does everything I want, exactly the way I want. Plus, it integrates native AI chat to create/manage/refine notes and ideas, and it plugs into a knowledge RAG system that I also built using Claude code.

What more could I ask for? This is a tool I wanted for a long time but never wanted to spend the dozens of hours dealing with the various pieces of tech I simply don’t care about long-term.

This was my AI “enlightenment” moment.

Why should anthropic open source Claude Code CLI? I understand you and some others want it, maybe it would be better for the community, but is it what’s best for anthropic?

Why should subscribers get your specific discount rather than what anthropic has calculated the discount should be?

I saw that rootmy.tv works for some versions of webos.

I'm not arguing that human brains are magic. the current AI models will probably teach us more about what we didn't know about intelligence than anything else.

Are you a stream of words or are your words the “simplistic” projection of your abstract thoughts? I don’t at all discount the importance of language in so many things, but the question that matters is whether statistical models of language can ever “learn” abstract thought, or become part of a system which uses them as a tool.

My personal assessment is that LLMs can do neither.

I feel terrible for anyone relying on anything you produce as a proompt engineer

This author obviously has no experience with investment banks.

OpenAI is massive, fairly risky, associated with Microsoft, etc. all true. What matters to JPM is potential future business. There’s potentially an enormous IPO in the future. The credit line is just good business. They are fostering the relationship.

Interesting. Not my experience at all. It makes mistakes that GPT-4 used to make: mixing languages (using Python syntax in C++ when I never asked any Python questions), imagining API calls that don’t exist in Google’s own products, writing 50 lines of C++ then inserting pseudo code or completely broken syntax.

A faster model that outperforms its slower version on multiple benchmarks? Can anyone explain why that makes sense? Are they simply retraining on the benchmark tests?

I am a vim user. I map caps lock to super for a dead simple app shortcut system. I prefer being able to switch applications perfectly over a more convenient escape key. macOS app switching is broken by default.

You’re just wrong. There are multiple pieces to learning languages. I had immense success with wanikani, improving my listening and reading.

Speaking can only be improved by speaking. No amount of language intake will improve output.