vtail

Fascinating! How did you learn about this?

Here is a GPT 5.5 Extra High with a modified instruction:

> 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...

Here is GPT 5.5 High thinking; I had to add a second follow up prompt "it's not animated though" as the first one was not animated.

https://gistpreview.github.io/?557f979c82701862bc26d24f10399...

that's a good point; hopefully they would just extend it automatically - but who knows...

Looking at the benchmarks, 5.4 is slightly better. But it also offers "Fast" mode (at 2x usage), which - if it works and doesn't completely depletes my Pro plan - is a no brainer at the same or even slightly worse quality for more interactive development.

My own experience is that I get far far more usage (and better quality code, too) from codex. I downgrade my Claude Max to Claude Pro (the $20 plan) and now using codex with Pro plan exclusively for everything.

Very cool site - I think I saw it before here on HN, and I liked it a lot.

Did you manually review all the edit results manually yourself, or do you have some kind of automated procedure?

Thanks - and no, I haven't seen this one. I like how they have the edit mode dashboard - show the original image + two edits; I was thinking about doing something like this.

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.

I would argue that it is a leader in vision-only FSD, which is useful for both self-driving and robots.

Thanks, these are fair arguments!

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.

You might be more informed that I am. We only have 3 and Y in the family. I based my statement on th fact that S/X were last refreshed 5 years ago; so they would need to be refreshed fairly soon.

Shutting down low-volume, complex project, that needs to be substantially redesigned to be competitive, while these resources can be redeployed elsewhere, in high growth areas? I disagree: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46805773

Hard to tell whether you are serious or sarcastic, but assuming it's the former: my contrarian position on CC vs SaaS is that in the quest to kill shitty businesses people will discover that creating a high-value SaaS is very non-trivial. CC would kill a whole category of low effort SaaS while at the same time substantially raising the quality bar for SaaS that people are willing to pay money for.

"HN is dying" is a cliche, I know, but I seriously want to bookmark this thread to revisit it in 10 years - I'm sure it will age even better than (in)famous Dropbox thread. So from that perspective, HN is alive and well :).

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?

Do people use Swift outside of Apple iOS/macOS development in real life? Especially on platforms like Windows/Linux/*BSD?

Prediction: the only remaining providers of AI-assisted tools in a few years will be the LLM companies themselves (think claude code, codex, gemini, future xai/Alibaba/etc.), via CLIs + integrations such as ASP.

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.

Hm... why not tokens as reported by each LLM provider? They already handle pricing for images etc.

thank you, I stand corrected

Update: Here is what o3 thinks about this topic: https://chatgpt.com/share/688030a9-8700-800b-8104-cca4cb1d0f...

Claude uses OpenAI-compatible APIs, and Claude Code respects environment variables that change the base url/token.

The most unexpected news to me was that Hacker News, apparently, runs on top of SBCL now, via a secret implementation of Arc in Common Lisp!

Thank you Josh. Is there a resource you can point us too that helps answer "what kind of MacBook pro memory do I need to run ABC model at XYZ quantization?"

But diluting OpenAi's (or any other company's, for that matter) market power does benefit the world.

No, I did not, and agree it would be an interesting experiment. Daylight Co still claims the absence of blue light, which cannot be achieved in an IPad from what I understand even with a filter.

For hand-writing, I just use the provided tools (Notebook and Reader). Notebook is OK, Reader is interesting but glitchy (it's their own software I think), but I'm sure Android ecosystem has solved these problems already - I just didn't yet feel the need to invest my time in discovering the best tools.

It's a reflective LCD, much better in a direct sunlight.

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.

Interesting feedback, thanks. My own reflections:

- 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.

I think it's a standard Wacom stylus. I like it overall, the writing is pretty fluid.

After a few days of using Daylight Computer, I have to admit that it solves all the pain points I had with Remarkable 2:

- 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.

Thank you for sharing your experience. It’s totally believable that FSD experience is very uneven across the country. Hopefully they will keep improving the system.

I often engage it on city streets, esp. when I’m tired, because it does reduce the stress of driving for me.

Last winter, when I was driving a lot on Spain highways, I really missed something like FSD or even a simpler Autopilot in my rental car.