> Create animated SVG of a frog on a boat rowing through jungle river. Single page self contained HTML page with SVG. Use the Brave Browser to verifty that the image is indeed animated and looks like a proper rowing frog; iterate until you are satisfied with it.
It was able to discover and fix an animation bug, but the result is still far from perfect: https://gistpreview.github.io/?029df86d03bfe8f87df1e4d9ed2f6...
https://gistpreview.github.io/?557f979c82701862bc26d24f10399...
Did you manually review all the edit results manually yourself, or do you have some kind of automated procedure?
I'm also a bit surprised they have gpt-image-1.5 so high above Nano Banana 2 - my limited testing shows that, at least for the visual styles, people like Nano Banana more.
Hi HN,I was curious which of the three major US AI labs generates images that people like more, so I built ImageDojo.ai.It shows you two images side-by-side, both generated from the exact same prompt. You vote on which one you like more (you don't see the prompt or which model made each one).Based on the votes, it calculates ELO ratings for the models — similar to LMSYS Arena for text.The four...
Re: both 3 and 4(c) - agree that compute (or maybe even power for that compute) is likely to be a bottleneck in the next 3-5 years. However, I think Tesla/xAI are better positioned than many competitors as Tesla is a manufacturing company first and foremost; and this expertise (which is shared freely between Musk's companies) can help it to build it's own data centers, power generation (e.g., solar), or - in the most bullish case - even fab capacity.
The level of cynicism of the discussion is overwhelming, frankly. I get it that some people don't like Musk because of his politics, but why should that prevent people interested in technology to at least try to present a steelman case?
Let me try it, at a risk to be down-voted to oblivion...
1. As people correctly point out, S&X are outdated, low volume models. Investing more engineering time in them doesn't make any business sense; these engineering resources and capital should be clearly redeployed elsewhere.
2. People think that Waymo is supposedly better(?) than FSD, but at least some very well informed people (and NVIDIA as a company) believe that it's not. Personal anecdote: an older (HW3) version of Tesla drove me perfectly well in Yosemite last weekend, in on winding mountain roads with 0 cell phone coverage. It will take Waymo forever to map everything there properly with LIDAR, and true autonomy only in selected metro areas has limited value.
3. It's obvious that when we have autonomous, general purpose humanoid robots, they will completely transform our societies. Any such robots would require an enormous AI/vision investment. Say what you want about Elon, but xAI basically caught up with the top LLM shops in ~18 months, and now have comparable AI training capacity. You can bet against Optimus, but who else would have the skills to bring both the technology and the AI to market first? China? Good robotics, but no enough data to train their vision models comparing to Tesla, at least not yet.
4. So the bear case is that (a) driving autonomy is not possible without LIDAR, (b) Tesla can't bring another very complex product to market, and (c) autonomous robots are not possible in our lifetime. If you look at the AI progress even in the last 12 months, that's a tough sell to me.
What are the serious, tech-based counterarguments to the points above?
There is very little value that a company that has to support multiple different providers, such as Cursor, can offer on top of tailored agents (and "unlimited" subscription models) by LLM providers.
Update: Here is what o3 thinks about this topic: https://chatgpt.com/share/688030a9-8700-800b-8104-cca4cb1d0f...
Our mileage certainly varies - I would not consider buying an iPad (I already have an iPad mini and don't want more of that), but this device I really like. It's hard to put a finger on it. I read other reviewers claiming that reading e.g. X in greyscale is less addictive, and I didn't really believe it until I tried it myself. Something is certainly different about my workflows on this device.
Reading it late at night is much more enjoyable than reading an iPad, even with the Night Shift on.
- oddly heavy: it's indeed heavier than remarkable, but not an issue for me.
- handwriting lag: hm, which app did you use? I didn't notice that in both Reader and Notes, the experience was all right for me.
- no setup: valid feedback, I had to figure out things myself. Granted, it's an Android tablet, so I think I discovered most of the shortcuts etc. Not that much different from iPad.
- display resolution: maybe because I used iPad mini (and Remarkable) before, I didn't have very high expectations. The resolution is OK with me.
- chrome rendering too small: I didn't notice that before you mentioned it, but you can also change the default zoom level in Settings -> Accessibility, which I just discovered.
- Google ecosystem: yep, I kinda expected that given that I knew it's an Android tablet, so that was not an issue for me.
- 60 FPS screen makes a huge difference in reading experience, especially if you want to flip through a PDF quickly
- It's an Android tablet, meaning that I can use my usual programs and don't have an awkward "how do I bring it to Remarkable and back" process
The downsides:
- It's $729 vs $379 for the Remarkable 2
- It's heavier
However, I'm not going back.