正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Claude → CRT. Built a procedural sci-fi interface generator in Three.js + TypeScript that outputs animated HUD compositions from modular elements—radar sweeps, waveforms, data cascades, ring gauges—arranged via BSP-subdivided layouts.

PurzBeats's profile picture

Purz.ai

16,858 subscribers

28,277 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Claude Fable 5 just one shot this procedural creatures! 🤯 Built a whole procedural 3D character generator in Three.js with: > Ragdoll-like characters made from primitive shapes that merge into one seamless body > Custom vertex shader + SDF tech that removes all seams and blends normals/colors perfectly > Fully procedural animation system that works for 2 legs, 4 legs, 6 legs, hopping, or flying > Physics-based tails/ears that stay seamlessly fused > Entire character defined in ~15 lines of JSON (AI can generate infinite new ones) PROMPT: Build with Three.js and explore a new procedurally generated 3D character style ragdoll-like characters composed of primitive shapes that look like one seamless body via a custom, mobile-performant tech-art/shader solution, with toon styling, plus a procedural animation system that works for 2-legged, any-legged, no-legged (hopping) and flying characters with arms. Goal: a unique, easily AI-generatable style with heavy juice and polish "HOLY SH** THIS WAS DONE WITH AI?" quality, "for the next billion dollar game."
0:33

Claude Fable 5 just one shot this procedural creatures! 🤯 Built a whole procedural 3D character generator in Three.js with: > Ragdoll-like characters made from primitive shapes that merge into one seamless body > Custom vertex shader + SDF tech that removes all seams and blends normals/colors perfectly > Fully procedural animation system that works for 2 legs, 4 legs, 6 legs, hopping, or flying > Physics-based tails/ears that stay seamlessly fused > Entire character defined in ~15 lines of JSON (AI can generate infinite new ones) PROMPT: Build with Three.js and explore a new procedurally generated 3D character style ragdoll-like characters composed of primitive shapes that look like one seamless body via a custom, mobile-performant tech-art/shader solution, with toon styling, plus a procedural animation system that works for 2-legged, any-legged, no-legged (hopping) and flying characters with arms. Goal: a unique, easily AI-generatable style with heavy juice and polish "HOLY SH** THIS WAS DONE WITH AI?" quality, "for the next billion dollar game."

Tim Jayas

48,018 次观看 • 2 个月前

A really impressive set of Three.js graphics experiments just got open sourced, and these are much more than little visual demos. They are basically reusable procedural systems for oceans, vegetation, fluids and even whole planets. 🔹 Poseidon A real-time FFT ocean running on WebGPU. It simulates large swells, smaller ripples, foam, reflections, choppy displacement and physically inspired wave spectra entirely in the browser. 🔹 Gaia A procedural grass generator where every blade, seed head and field comes from a deterministic genome and environmental parameters. No authored grass models. 🔹 Dryad A procedural flora system that generates trees and other plant forms from physics, environmental conditions and a seed. No authored 3D models or textures are needed for the plants themselves. 🔹 Tiamat A real-time GPU fluid simulation using around 100,000 SPH particles, with the resulting water rendered directly in the browser. 🔹 Demiurge Probably the craziest one. It procedurally builds an entire planet from tectonic plates, then lets uplift drive erosion, erosion and latitude drive climate, and climate drive biomes, wind and weather. You can move seamlessly from orbit down to the surface. What I really like here is that these are not just pretty outputs. They are actual building blocks. Ocean simulation, vegetation generation, fluid dynamics and procedural worlds are exactly the kinds of systems that can be plugged into games, simulations and agent-built 3D environments. Project by: Owen
1:17

A really impressive set of Three.js graphics experiments just got open sourced, and these are much more than little visual demos. They are basically reusable procedural systems for oceans, vegetation, fluids and even whole planets. 🔹 Poseidon A real-time FFT ocean running on WebGPU. It simulates large swells, smaller ripples, foam, reflections, choppy displacement and physically inspired wave spectra entirely in the browser. 🔹 Gaia A procedural grass generator where every blade, seed head and field comes from a deterministic genome and environmental parameters. No authored grass models. 🔹 Dryad A procedural flora system that generates trees and other plant forms from physics, environmental conditions and a seed. No authored 3D models or textures are needed for the plants themselves. 🔹 Tiamat A real-time GPU fluid simulation using around 100,000 SPH particles, with the resulting water rendered directly in the browser. 🔹 Demiurge Probably the craziest one. It procedurally builds an entire planet from tectonic plates, then lets uplift drive erosion, erosion and latitude drive climate, and climate drive biomes, wind and weather. You can move seamlessly from orbit down to the surface. What I really like here is that these are not just pretty outputs. They are actual building blocks. Ocean simulation, vegetation generation, fluid dynamics and procedural worlds are exactly the kinds of systems that can be plugged into games, simulations and agent-built 3D environments. Project by: Owen

Token Gremlin

33,639 次观看 • 24 天前

GLM-5.1 > Claude Code (Opus 4.6)? I'm tripping or CC has become very bad but built a Three.js racing game to eval and it's extremely impressive. Thoughts: - One-shot car physics with real drift mechanics (this is hard) - My fav part: Awesome at self iterating (with no vision!) created 20+ Bun.WebView debugging tools to drive the car programmatically and read game state. Proved a winding bug with vector math without ever seeing the screen - 531-line racing AI in a single write: 4 personalities, curvature map, racing lines, tactical drifting. Built telemetry tools to compare player vs AI speed curves and data-tuned parameters - All assets from scratch: 3D models, procedural textures, sky shader, engine sounds, spatial AI audio! - Can do hard math: proved road normals pointed DOWN via vector cross products, computed track curvature normalized by arc length to tune AI cornering speed You are going to hear about this model a lot in the next months - open source let's go 🚀🚀
0:25

GLM-5.1 > Claude Code (Opus 4.6)? I'm tripping or CC has become very bad but built a Three.js racing game to eval and it's extremely impressive. Thoughts: - One-shot car physics with real drift mechanics (this is hard) - My fav part: Awesome at self iterating (with no vision!) created 20+ Bun.WebView debugging tools to drive the car programmatically and read game state. Proved a winding bug with vector math without ever seeing the screen - 531-line racing AI in a single write: 4 personalities, curvature map, racing lines, tactical drifting. Built telemetry tools to compare player vs AI speed curves and data-tuned parameters - All assets from scratch: 3D models, procedural textures, sky shader, engine sounds, spatial AI audio! - Can do hard math: proved road normals pointed DOWN via vector cross products, computed track curvature normalized by arc length to tune AI cornering speed You are going to hear about this model a lot in the next months - open source let's go 🚀🚀

Victor M

202,410 次观看 • 4 个月前

We've been obsessing a lot about creating the best possible AI support experience Dub.co. And I think we've found the magic formula. The stack: ✦ Mintlify → docs + help articles ✦ Upstash vector → vector search ✦ AI SDK + Claude sonnet → LLM/retrieval ✦ Plain → support infra Here's how it works: We consolidated our docs + help articles on Mintlify (best-in-class docs platform) so all our support content is now in one place. On every push to main, we sync changes to our Upstash Vector DB. We also built a custom chat interface that retrieves content from Upstash Vector and generates responses via AI SDK + Claude sonnet. The best part: The AI agent uses 𝚝𝚘𝚘𝚕() from AI SDK to retrieve the user's workspace / partner data to provide accurate responses. Finally, if the user needs to speak to a human, we generate a 𝚃𝚒𝚌𝚔𝚎𝚝𝚄𝚙𝚕𝚘𝚊𝚍 UI that lets users upload screenshots + add more context, before creating a ticket on Plain. Cherry on top: The chat interface is embeddable, so we're able to embed it both in our Mintlify docs + support portal 👇 Since we launched this, it's been a gamechanger for scaling support – reducing support workload and creating a much better experience for our users. Highly recommend giving this a try!
0:30

We've been obsessing a lot about creating the best possible AI support experience Dub.co. And I think we've found the magic formula. The stack: ✦ Mintlify → docs + help articles ✦ Upstash vector → vector search ✦ AI SDK + Claude sonnet → LLM/retrieval ✦ Plain → support infra Here's how it works: We consolidated our docs + help articles on Mintlify (best-in-class docs platform) so all our support content is now in one place. On every push to main, we sync changes to our Upstash Vector DB. We also built a custom chat interface that retrieves content from Upstash Vector and generates responses via AI SDK + Claude sonnet. The best part: The AI agent uses 𝚝𝚘𝚘𝚕() from AI SDK to retrieve the user's workspace / partner data to provide accurate responses. Finally, if the user needs to speak to a human, we generate a 𝚃𝚒𝚌𝚔𝚎𝚝𝚄𝚙𝚕𝚘𝚊𝚍 UI that lets users upload screenshots + add more context, before creating a ticket on Plain. Cherry on top: The chat interface is embeddable, so we're able to embed it both in our Mintlify docs + support portal 👇 Since we launched this, it's been a gamechanger for scaling support – reducing support workload and creating a much better experience for our users. Highly recommend giving this a try!

Steven Tey

22,918 次观看 • 6 个月前

Thrilled to announce Kingnet AI V2 is now officially live ! We have officially deployed on the BNB Chain first ! Whether you're an enthusiast or a professional game developer, come and try it out now： Each generated asset costs approximately $3 and supports export in professional game-editing formats. We will soon support exporting assets in NFT on-chain formats, empowering Web3 users and partners with seamless integration. Jump down more rabbit holes next.👇 📔 Product Introduction： By conversing naturally with agent Joi, users can achieve a complete automated game development cycle - from requirement proposal to finished product delivery. Users simply need to describe their game concepts and design requirements in natural language, and Joi will automatically utilize built-in generator including: • Animation Generator： AI-driven motion generation with auto-rigging technology for instant character animation • Map Generator： Procedural map generation with built-in logic validation for consistent world-building • Numerical Generator： Automated game economy tuning for fair yet challenging gameplay systems • Editable Code Generator： Generates clean, maintainable game logic code with multi-platform/multi-language support • Interface Generator： Intelligent layout engine that optimizes user experience and interaction flow Joi intelligently generates all necessary game components, performs multi-dimensional feasibility checks, and ultimately completes game synthesis, packaging and deployment. Users can directly click to try the game on the chat interface, or download the complete editable code package to achieve rapid iteration and secondary development. 🎯 Core Architecture： 1/ Natural Language Understanding & Multimodal Intent Parsing: Utilizing advanced deep learning NLP models (e.g., Transformer-based language understanding models), Joi precisely interprets user natural language inputs and extracts core game design intents and parameters. Through semantic segmentation and entity recognition, complex requirements are decomposed into specific tasks for animation, map, numerical systems, UI, and code modules. 2/ Modular Editor System & API Integration: Joi employs a unified API framework to enable seamless collaboration between editor modules, ensuring high compatibility in data formats and workflows. 3/ Intelligent Validation & Quality Assurance: The system incorporates multi-dimensional verification mechanisms including animation continuity checks, map pathfinding and physical logic validation, game balance analysis, UI interaction consistency verification, and static/dynamic code security testing. Automated testing and feedback loops ensure outputs meet high-standard game design specifications. 4/ Automatic Synthesis, Packaging & Instant Deployment: Verified resources are automatically integrated to complete game compilation, packaging and deployment. Supports one-click generation of playable online links and downloadable complete code packages for immediate testing or deep customization/iterative development. 5/ Interactive Chat Interface & Seamless UX: The entire workflow is completed within the chat interface, significantly reducing traditional game development's communication and operational barriers. Users accomplish complex game design and development through conversation while receiving real-time feedback and adjustment suggestions, democratizing game creation. 6/ Industry-Disrupting Value: Transforms traditional manual development into AI-driven automated pipelines.
1:24

Thrilled to announce Kingnet AI V2 is now officially live ! We have officially deployed on the BNB Chain first ! Whether you're an enthusiast or a professional game developer, come and try it out now： Each generated asset costs approximately $3 and supports export in professional game-editing formats. We will soon support exporting assets in NFT on-chain formats, empowering Web3 users and partners with seamless integration. Jump down more rabbit holes next.👇 📔 Product Introduction： By conversing naturally with agent Joi, users can achieve a complete automated game development cycle - from requirement proposal to finished product delivery. Users simply need to describe their game concepts and design requirements in natural language, and Joi will automatically utilize built-in generator including: • Animation Generator： AI-driven motion generation with auto-rigging technology for instant character animation • Map Generator： Procedural map generation with built-in logic validation for consistent world-building • Numerical Generator： Automated game economy tuning for fair yet challenging gameplay systems • Editable Code Generator： Generates clean, maintainable game logic code with multi-platform/multi-language support • Interface Generator： Intelligent layout engine that optimizes user experience and interaction flow Joi intelligently generates all necessary game components, performs multi-dimensional feasibility checks, and ultimately completes game synthesis, packaging and deployment. Users can directly click to try the game on the chat interface, or download the complete editable code package to achieve rapid iteration and secondary development. 🎯 Core Architecture： 1/ Natural Language Understanding & Multimodal Intent Parsing: Utilizing advanced deep learning NLP models (e.g., Transformer-based language understanding models), Joi precisely interprets user natural language inputs and extracts core game design intents and parameters. Through semantic segmentation and entity recognition, complex requirements are decomposed into specific tasks for animation, map, numerical systems, UI, and code modules. 2/ Modular Editor System & API Integration: Joi employs a unified API framework to enable seamless collaboration between editor modules, ensuring high compatibility in data formats and workflows. 3/ Intelligent Validation & Quality Assurance: The system incorporates multi-dimensional verification mechanisms including animation continuity checks, map pathfinding and physical logic validation, game balance analysis, UI interaction consistency verification, and static/dynamic code security testing. Automated testing and feedback loops ensure outputs meet high-standard game design specifications. 4/ Automatic Synthesis, Packaging & Instant Deployment: Verified resources are automatically integrated to complete game compilation, packaging and deployment. Supports one-click generation of playable online links and downloadable complete code packages for immediate testing or deep customization/iterative development. 5/ Interactive Chat Interface & Seamless UX: The entire workflow is completed within the chat interface, significantly reducing traditional game development's communication and operational barriers. Users accomplish complex game design and development through conversation while receiving real-time feedback and adjustment suggestions, democratizing game creation. 6/ Industry-Disrupting Value: Transforms traditional manual development into AI-driven automated pipelines.

Kingnet AI

46,407 次观看 • 1 年前

Learn to build your own voice-activated AI assistant that can execute tasks like gathering recent AI news from the web, scripting out a podcast, and using tools to put all that into a multi-speaker podcast. See our new short course: "Building Live Voice Agents with Google’s ADK (Agent Development Kit),” taught by Google’s Lavi Nigam and Sita Lakshmi Sangameswaran. ADK provides modular components that make it easy to build and debug agents. It also includes a built-in web interface for tracing agentic reasoning. This course illustrates these concepts via building a live voice agent that can chain actions to complete a complex task like creating a podcast. This requires maintaining context, implementing guardrails, reasoning, and handling audio streaming, while keeping latency low. You’ll learn to: - Build voice agents that listen, reason, and respond - Guide your agent to follow a specific workflow to accomplish a task - Coordinate specialized agents to build an agentic podcast workflow that researches topics and produces multi-speaker audio - Understand how to deploy an agent into production Even if you’re not yet building voice systems, you'll find understanding how realtime agents stream data and maintain reliability useful for designing modern agentic applications. Please join here:
2:12

Learn to build your own voice-activated AI assistant that can execute tasks like gathering recent AI news from the web, scripting out a podcast, and using tools to put all that into a multi-speaker podcast. See our new short course: "Building Live Voice Agents with Google’s ADK (Agent Development Kit),” taught by Google’s Lavi Nigam and Sita Lakshmi Sangameswaran. ADK provides modular components that make it easy to build and debug agents. It also includes a built-in web interface for tracing agentic reasoning. This course illustrates these concepts via building a live voice agent that can chain actions to complete a complex task like creating a podcast. This requires maintaining context, implementing guardrails, reasoning, and handling audio streaming, while keeping latency low. You’ll learn to: - Build voice agents that listen, reason, and respond - Guide your agent to follow a specific workflow to accomplish a task - Coordinate specialized agents to build an agentic podcast workflow that researches topics and produces multi-speaker audio - Understand how to deploy an agent into production Even if you’re not yet building voice systems, you'll find understanding how realtime agents stream data and maintain reliability useful for designing modern agentic applications. Please join here:

Andrew Ng

118,297 次观看 • 10 个月前

Anthropic released Claude Design TODAY and it's now accessible at I spent the last hour giving it a first look, and shared my thoughts and results in the video below. This is a BIG drop. This is a new design surface from Anthropic, and it changes what "AI design" means. Short version: Claude can now design. Not "describe a design." Not "generate an image of a design." Actual production work — prototypes, wireframes, high-fidelity mocks, slide decks, landing pages — editable, on-brand, and ready to hand off. Here's what stood out on first look: → Real design surfaces Prototypes, wireframes, hi-fi, and slide decks — each with templates and proper structure, not just pretty screenshots. → Comment-based edits Leave a comment on any element and Claude revises it. This is the Figma-style review loop, with the designer replaced by a model that works at 3am. → Brand design systems You can feed it your system — colors, type, components — and it actually respects it. On-brand output, not generic AI slop. → Export anywhere PDF, PowerPoint, Canva, standalone HTML. Plus a built-in handoff straight to Claude Code for engineers to implement. → Import from real tools Figma, GitHub, and captured web elements come in as inputs. Your existing work is the starting line, not the discard pile. → Collaboration Share links for view / comment / edit — the exact tier system teams already expect. What I tested on Opus 4.7: • A 5-slide deck generated from a single screenshot. Claude asked clarifying questions BEFORE generating and shipped speaker notes by default. • A landing page build. Solid first pass, real components, real layout logic. • Multiple chats running concurrently. You can parallelize design work across threads like a small team. Why this matters: PMs, founders, marketers, and non-engineers can now create designs that engineers can actually ship with production-ready output and a claude code handoff built in. The gap between "I have an idea" and "here's a working prototype with my brand applied" just collapsed to minutes. Full walkthrough, live demos, exports, and honest takes on where it breaks below. P.S. • This is an Anthropic Labs product — NOT GA yet. • Claude Design is currently webapp only (no API), and does not yet support the Analytics API, Compliance API, or cost/usage reporting. • Availability: – Default ON for Pro / Max / Team – Default OFF for Enterprise Enterprise admins can toggle it on via RBAC in console (comes with a ~$20/user initial credit).
18:30

Anthropic released Claude Design TODAY and it's now accessible at I spent the last hour giving it a first look, and shared my thoughts and results in the video below. This is a BIG drop. This is a new design surface from Anthropic, and it changes what "AI design" means. Short version: Claude can now design. Not "describe a design." Not "generate an image of a design." Actual production work — prototypes, wireframes, high-fidelity mocks, slide decks, landing pages — editable, on-brand, and ready to hand off. Here's what stood out on first look: → Real design surfaces Prototypes, wireframes, hi-fi, and slide decks — each with templates and proper structure, not just pretty screenshots. → Comment-based edits Leave a comment on any element and Claude revises it. This is the Figma-style review loop, with the designer replaced by a model that works at 3am. → Brand design systems You can feed it your system — colors, type, components — and it actually respects it. On-brand output, not generic AI slop. → Export anywhere PDF, PowerPoint, Canva, standalone HTML. Plus a built-in handoff straight to Claude Code for engineers to implement. → Import from real tools Figma, GitHub, and captured web elements come in as inputs. Your existing work is the starting line, not the discard pile. → Collaboration Share links for view / comment / edit — the exact tier system teams already expect. What I tested on Opus 4.7: • A 5-slide deck generated from a single screenshot. Claude asked clarifying questions BEFORE generating and shipped speaker notes by default. • A landing page build. Solid first pass, real components, real layout logic. • Multiple chats running concurrently. You can parallelize design work across threads like a small team. Why this matters: PMs, founders, marketers, and non-engineers can now create designs that engineers can actually ship with production-ready output and a claude code handoff built in. The gap between "I have an idea" and "here's a working prototype with my brand applied" just collapsed to minutes. Full walkthrough, live demos, exports, and honest takes on where it breaks below. P.S. • This is an Anthropic Labs product — NOT GA yet. • Claude Design is currently webapp only (no API), and does not yet support the Analytics API, Compliance API, or cost/usage reporting. • Availability: – Default ON for Pro / Max / Team – Default OFF for Enterprise Enterprise admins can toggle it on via RBAC in console (comes with a ~$20/user initial credit).

JJ Englert

32,445 次观看 • 4 个月前

Claude Code cannot read 300 files at once. So someone built a system that lets it control NotebookLM from the terminal instead. The results are wild. Here is the full workflow nobody is talking about: The Setup → Claude Code connects to NotebookLM via a command line interface → Claude searches YouTube, finds relevant videos, uploads them as sources automatically → NotebookLM processes up to 300 sources simultaneously and returns cited, grounded answers → Everything syncs back into your Obsidian vault with passage-level citations you can click to verify Why This Changes Research Forever → No more 20 browser tabs you never close → No more copy-pasting outputs into random notes → No more hallucinated answers with no sources to back them up → 60% of citations verified as strong matches in accuracy audits - answers are grounded in real data What Claude Can Do From the Terminal → Search YouTube for relevant videos on any topic and rank by relevance → Create a new NotebookLM notebook and add 20 sources in parallel automatically → Ask questions and export cited answers directly into Obsidian with wikilinks → Set custom personas per notebook - concise, no filler, no preamble → Generate audio overviews and save them as MP3 files into your vault → Build mind maps, flashcard decks, and research dashboards from your sources → Search arXiv for academic papers and feed them directly into NotebookLM → Upload competitor blog posts, podcast episodes, PDFs, and your own vault notes The Obsidian Output → Every answer arrives with clickable citations that link to the exact passage in the source video or article → Graph view shows connections between all 20 sources and the topics they share → Q&A log tracks every question asked and the grounded response received → Source dashboard shows citation frequency, topics extracted, and which questions each source answered Use Cases Worth Building Today → Academic research with arXiv papers, full citation traceability → Competitor analysis from their YouTube channels and blog posts → Company knowledge base for onboarding, new employees ask NotebookLM instead of interrupting teammates → Podcast research, feed 4-hour Lex Fridman episodes and ask what's new in AI this week → Personal second brain, 300 daily notes uploaded and queryable in one notebook Before this system existed you needed 20 tabs, hours of manual reading, and no guarantee the answers were real. Now you type one prompt in the terminal and Claude does all of it for you. The research stack of 2026 is not a browser. It is a terminal connected to everything
32:50

Claude Code cannot read 300 files at once. So someone built a system that lets it control NotebookLM from the terminal instead. The results are wild. Here is the full workflow nobody is talking about: The Setup → Claude Code connects to NotebookLM via a command line interface → Claude searches YouTube, finds relevant videos, uploads them as sources automatically → NotebookLM processes up to 300 sources simultaneously and returns cited, grounded answers → Everything syncs back into your Obsidian vault with passage-level citations you can click to verify Why This Changes Research Forever → No more 20 browser tabs you never close → No more copy-pasting outputs into random notes → No more hallucinated answers with no sources to back them up → 60% of citations verified as strong matches in accuracy audits - answers are grounded in real data What Claude Can Do From the Terminal → Search YouTube for relevant videos on any topic and rank by relevance → Create a new NotebookLM notebook and add 20 sources in parallel automatically → Ask questions and export cited answers directly into Obsidian with wikilinks → Set custom personas per notebook - concise, no filler, no preamble → Generate audio overviews and save them as MP3 files into your vault → Build mind maps, flashcard decks, and research dashboards from your sources → Search arXiv for academic papers and feed them directly into NotebookLM → Upload competitor blog posts, podcast episodes, PDFs, and your own vault notes The Obsidian Output → Every answer arrives with clickable citations that link to the exact passage in the source video or article → Graph view shows connections between all 20 sources and the topics they share → Q&A log tracks every question asked and the grounded response received → Source dashboard shows citation frequency, topics extracted, and which questions each source answered Use Cases Worth Building Today → Academic research with arXiv papers, full citation traceability → Competitor analysis from their YouTube channels and blog posts → Company knowledge base for onboarding, new employees ask NotebookLM instead of interrupting teammates → Podcast research, feed 4-hour Lex Fridman episodes and ask what's new in AI this week → Personal second brain, 300 daily notes uploaded and queryable in one notebook Before this system existed you needed 20 tabs, hours of manual reading, and no guarantee the answers were real. Now you type one prompt in the terminal and Claude does all of it for you. The research stack of 2026 is not a browser. It is a terminal connected to everything

Dami-Defi

252,693 次观看 • 3 个月前

OpenLedger X Morpheus The partnership of openledger with Morpheus enables Use Morpheus to build "The Autonomous Smart Contract Engineer" on top of OpenLedger. What is Morpheus? Morpheus is a Web3-native AI coding agent that turns natural language into executable smart contracts and full-stack dApps. It is powered by a specialized Solidity model built on top of OpenLedger, tailored for the unique demands of secure and efficient onchain development. It goes beyond code generation. Using fine-tuned models, agent-based architecture, and modular plugin support, Morpheus automates the entire development pipeline-from writing and simulating contracts to deploying and maintaining them. Its mission is to reduce the barrier to dApp creation while enabling autonomous agents and individuals to participate in decentralized economies. Why OpenLedger? The rise of AI agents in Web3 raises urgent questions around transparency, attribution, explainability, and contributor incentives. OpenLedger provides the infrastructure to ensure that contributor data used in model outputs is recorded with verifiable attribution. Through Proof of Attribution, contributors-whether they provide prompts, datasets, or logic refinements-can receive credit and rewards when their work influences model behavior. But attribution alone isn’t enough. In critical domains like smart contract deployment, DeFi automation, and DAO governance, understanding why a model made a decision is just as important as the output itself. OpenLedger supports explainability by linking outputs back to their original data sources-allowing developers and auditors to trace logic, validate decisions, and build trust in AI-powered systems. OpenLedger supports Morpheus by: Recording which data was used in generating model outputs Enabling verifiable attribution of contributed datasets Powering reward mechanisms for contributors Offering scalable and efficient model execution via OpenLoRA Supporting transparency and traceability in model decision-making This creates an open, rewardable foundation for AI-driven coding-without relying on opaque systems. How is the system built? The Morpheus architecture has three layers: Datanet Layer OpenLedger powers Morpheus with a specialized Datanet - a decentralized data layer where developers, auditors, and contributors can share smart contract patterns, audit logs, exploit reports, and logic modules. Each submission is recorded onchain with attribution using OpenLedger’s Proof of Attribution. As the model learns and evolves from this data, contributors receive rewards proportional to their impact on future outputs. The Morpheus architecture has two layers: Intent Layer Users describe what they want to build. Example: "Create a token with tax logic that routes to a DAO." Morpheus parses the instruction, retrieves relevant contract types, and plans a modular execution flow. Agent Layer The agent generates, tests, and assembles the contract. It handles versioning, logic validation, and deployment readiness. Security checks-reentrancy protection, overflow control, gas modeling-are embedded into the generation phase. Generated outputs are mapped to their source data using OpenLedger’s Proof of Attribution, providing traceability across the pipeline. How does the AI model work? Morpheus is being powered by a specialized Solidity model built on top of OpenLedger. This model is purpose-built to handle the nuances of smart contract logic, security, and upgradeability. Unlike generalized coding agents, it is designed specifically for EVM environments and Web3 use cases, drawing from real protocol data and security best practices. Morpheus is fine-tuned on a vertical stack of smart contract data: Audited protocol code (e.g., Uniswap V4, Compound) OpenZeppelin libraries and EIP reference implementations Smart contract vulnerability reports and exploit reconstructions Edge cases from fuzz testing and adversarial examples It uses models like CodeLlama and DeepSeek-Coder, enhanced through RAG pipelines referencing standardized security patterns and emerging protocol designs. This training stack is integrated into a continuous feedback loop, enabling real-time specialization for EVM and beyond. Why a specialized model is needed? Smart contract development is uniquely high-stakes. A generalized AI model is not enough. As 'vibe coding' and natural language programming become more common, we're seeing an influx of AI-generated code in Web3 as well. But smart contracts are not frontends or prototypes-they govern real value, enforce trustless execution, and often become immutable after deployment. Billions have been lost in Web3 due to bugs and inefficiencies: In 2022 alone, over $3.8 billion was stolen due to smart contract exploits, many of which stemmed from avoidable issues like reentrancy, integer overflows, or access control failures. Inefficient contract structures lead to unnecessary gas consumption. Optimizing for gas can reduce costs by up to 40%, saving projects millions over time. Upgradeable contract patterns, like UUPS or Transparent Proxies, require strict adherence to storage layout and initialization rules. Mistakes here often go undetected by generic models and can render a contract unupgradeable or vulnerable. A specialized Solidity model is trained on real-world exploits, EIP standards, and libraries like OpenZeppelin to: Generate secure, gas-efficient code by default Recognize and correctly implement complex proxy patterns Map user intent to modular, auditable contract architectures Incorporate battle-tested logic from audited protocols and fuzz-tested edge cases Morpheus goes beyond syntax-it understands the nuances of decentralized infrastructure and deploys code that meets production-grade standards. What applications will this enable Token creation with built-in logic (tax, liquidity, governance) DeFi automations triggered by market conditions Payment contracts between agents and contributors DAO tooling with dynamic NFT-based voting Cross-chain bridging logic tied to real-world oracles Asset issuance flows through chat-based interfaces Natural language contract templates with reusable logic Each of these flows is backed by OpenLedger’s Proof of Attribution-ensuring traceability, explainability, and fair rewards across the ecosystem. This is the future of AI-native development. Open. Attributed. Explainable. Community-powered. Morpheus and OpenLedger are building the first system for autonomous coding agents where: Contributor work is recorded onchain Reuse is incentivized through attribution Model outputs are traceable and explainable Contracts evolve through human-agent collaboration Anyone can contribute prompts, logic, or flows-and get rewarded The smart contract engineer is no longer a human-only role. It is an agentic, decentralized, and transparent process-powered by OpenLedger.
0:28

OpenLedger X Morpheus The partnership of openledger with Morpheus enables Use Morpheus to build "The Autonomous Smart Contract Engineer" on top of OpenLedger. What is Morpheus? Morpheus is a Web3-native AI coding agent that turns natural language into executable smart contracts and full-stack dApps. It is powered by a specialized Solidity model built on top of OpenLedger, tailored for the unique demands of secure and efficient onchain development. It goes beyond code generation. Using fine-tuned models, agent-based architecture, and modular plugin support, Morpheus automates the entire development pipeline-from writing and simulating contracts to deploying and maintaining them. Its mission is to reduce the barrier to dApp creation while enabling autonomous agents and individuals to participate in decentralized economies. Why OpenLedger? The rise of AI agents in Web3 raises urgent questions around transparency, attribution, explainability, and contributor incentives. OpenLedger provides the infrastructure to ensure that contributor data used in model outputs is recorded with verifiable attribution. Through Proof of Attribution, contributors-whether they provide prompts, datasets, or logic refinements-can receive credit and rewards when their work influences model behavior. But attribution alone isn’t enough. In critical domains like smart contract deployment, DeFi automation, and DAO governance, understanding why a model made a decision is just as important as the output itself. OpenLedger supports explainability by linking outputs back to their original data sources-allowing developers and auditors to trace logic, validate decisions, and build trust in AI-powered systems. OpenLedger supports Morpheus by: Recording which data was used in generating model outputs Enabling verifiable attribution of contributed datasets Powering reward mechanisms for contributors Offering scalable and efficient model execution via OpenLoRA Supporting transparency and traceability in model decision-making This creates an open, rewardable foundation for AI-driven coding-without relying on opaque systems. How is the system built? The Morpheus architecture has three layers: Datanet Layer OpenLedger powers Morpheus with a specialized Datanet - a decentralized data layer where developers, auditors, and contributors can share smart contract patterns, audit logs, exploit reports, and logic modules. Each submission is recorded onchain with attribution using OpenLedger’s Proof of Attribution. As the model learns and evolves from this data, contributors receive rewards proportional to their impact on future outputs. The Morpheus architecture has two layers: Intent Layer Users describe what they want to build. Example: "Create a token with tax logic that routes to a DAO." Morpheus parses the instruction, retrieves relevant contract types, and plans a modular execution flow. Agent Layer The agent generates, tests, and assembles the contract. It handles versioning, logic validation, and deployment readiness. Security checks-reentrancy protection, overflow control, gas modeling-are embedded into the generation phase. Generated outputs are mapped to their source data using OpenLedger’s Proof of Attribution, providing traceability across the pipeline. How does the AI model work? Morpheus is being powered by a specialized Solidity model built on top of OpenLedger. This model is purpose-built to handle the nuances of smart contract logic, security, and upgradeability. Unlike generalized coding agents, it is designed specifically for EVM environments and Web3 use cases, drawing from real protocol data and security best practices. Morpheus is fine-tuned on a vertical stack of smart contract data: Audited protocol code (e.g., Uniswap V4, Compound) OpenZeppelin libraries and EIP reference implementations Smart contract vulnerability reports and exploit reconstructions Edge cases from fuzz testing and adversarial examples It uses models like CodeLlama and DeepSeek-Coder, enhanced through RAG pipelines referencing standardized security patterns and emerging protocol designs. This training stack is integrated into a continuous feedback loop, enabling real-time specialization for EVM and beyond. Why a specialized model is needed? Smart contract development is uniquely high-stakes. A generalized AI model is not enough. As 'vibe coding' and natural language programming become more common, we're seeing an influx of AI-generated code in Web3 as well. But smart contracts are not frontends or prototypes-they govern real value, enforce trustless execution, and often become immutable after deployment. Billions have been lost in Web3 due to bugs and inefficiencies: In 2022 alone, over $3.8 billion was stolen due to smart contract exploits, many of which stemmed from avoidable issues like reentrancy, integer overflows, or access control failures. Inefficient contract structures lead to unnecessary gas consumption. Optimizing for gas can reduce costs by up to 40%, saving projects millions over time. Upgradeable contract patterns, like UUPS or Transparent Proxies, require strict adherence to storage layout and initialization rules. Mistakes here often go undetected by generic models and can render a contract unupgradeable or vulnerable. A specialized Solidity model is trained on real-world exploits, EIP standards, and libraries like OpenZeppelin to: Generate secure, gas-efficient code by default Recognize and correctly implement complex proxy patterns Map user intent to modular, auditable contract architectures Incorporate battle-tested logic from audited protocols and fuzz-tested edge cases Morpheus goes beyond syntax-it understands the nuances of decentralized infrastructure and deploys code that meets production-grade standards. What applications will this enable Token creation with built-in logic (tax, liquidity, governance) DeFi automations triggered by market conditions Payment contracts between agents and contributors DAO tooling with dynamic NFT-based voting Cross-chain bridging logic tied to real-world oracles Asset issuance flows through chat-based interfaces Natural language contract templates with reusable logic Each of these flows is backed by OpenLedger’s Proof of Attribution-ensuring traceability, explainability, and fair rewards across the ecosystem. This is the future of AI-native development. Open. Attributed. Explainable. Community-powered. Morpheus and OpenLedger are building the first system for autonomous coding agents where: Contributor work is recorded onchain Reuse is incentivized through attribution Model outputs are traceable and explainable Contracts evolve through human-agent collaboration Anyone can contribute prompts, logic, or flows-and get rewarded The smart contract engineer is no longer a human-only role. It is an agentic, decentralized, and transparent process-powered by OpenLedger.

OpenLedger

46,944 次观看 • 1 年前

JustHireMe V0.1.31 is out. 🔗 Github: 📥 Download: The first post hit 390K impressions, 3.2K likes, 6K+ bookmarks, 1.2k+ GitHub stars and 400+ downloads . Genuinely didn't expect that. I've been shipping updates since and this release is a big one. Full video walkthrough attached but here's what's new: Command Center — proper dashboard now — active leads, scores, agent status, top roles — all in one screen — no more clicking around to figure out where things stand Customize One Job — paste any job URL — agent captures the JD, scores your fit, shows keyword gaps — generates a tailored resume + cover letter as PDFs — one page, one flow Outreach Generator — every lead now comes with ready-to-copy messages — 3-line founder DM — LinkedIn connection note — cold email — all written from your real profile, not templates Knowledge Graph (rebuilt from scratch) — Relation Atlas - weighted ribbons showing how projects prove skills — Gravity Graph - force-directed career layout — 3D Orbit - rotate through your profile in 3D — Curated mode - strongest evidence paths only — this is what the matching engine actually uses to rank you Job Pipeline — stages: Hot → New → Rated → Ready → Applied → Discarded — Fit score + Quality score on every lead — search, filter, re-eval, bulk clean, export — feels like a real job search CRM now Live Activity Stream — "what is the agent thinking?" — real-time logs of every query, eval, and decision — full transparency, nothing hidden Built-in AI Assistant — ask the app how to configure sources, understand a lead, generate packages — right inside the dashboard Modular Agent Config — Scout, Evaluator, Generator, Ingestor — each one independently configurable — pick your own models and thresholds Still local-first. Still privacy-first. Still open source. Still free. Your data never leaves your machine. If you starred the repo last time — pull the new release. If you bookmarked and forgot — now's a good time. Feedback, issues, PRs, or just a ⭐— all welcome. ⭐ 📥 #OpenSource #AgenticAI #AIAgents #GraphRAG #Python #FastAPI #ReactJS #TypeScript #Tauri #JobSearch #CareerTech #PrivacyFirst
1:15

JustHireMe V0.1.31 is out. 🔗 Github: 📥 Download: The first post hit 390K impressions, 3.2K likes, 6K+ bookmarks, 1.2k+ GitHub stars and 400+ downloads . Genuinely didn't expect that. I've been shipping updates since and this release is a big one. Full video walkthrough attached but here's what's new: Command Center — proper dashboard now — active leads, scores, agent status, top roles — all in one screen — no more clicking around to figure out where things stand Customize One Job — paste any job URL — agent captures the JD, scores your fit, shows keyword gaps — generates a tailored resume + cover letter as PDFs — one page, one flow Outreach Generator — every lead now comes with ready-to-copy messages — 3-line founder DM — LinkedIn connection note — cold email — all written from your real profile, not templates Knowledge Graph (rebuilt from scratch) — Relation Atlas - weighted ribbons showing how projects prove skills — Gravity Graph - force-directed career layout — 3D Orbit - rotate through your profile in 3D — Curated mode - strongest evidence paths only — this is what the matching engine actually uses to rank you Job Pipeline — stages: Hot → New → Rated → Ready → Applied → Discarded — Fit score + Quality score on every lead — search, filter, re-eval, bulk clean, export — feels like a real job search CRM now Live Activity Stream — "what is the agent thinking?" — real-time logs of every query, eval, and decision — full transparency, nothing hidden Built-in AI Assistant — ask the app how to configure sources, understand a lead, generate packages — right inside the dashboard Modular Agent Config — Scout, Evaluator, Generator, Ingestor — each one independently configurable — pick your own models and thresholds Still local-first. Still privacy-first. Still open source. Still free. Your data never leaves your machine. If you starred the repo last time — pull the new release. If you bookmarked and forgot — now's a good time. Feedback, issues, PRs, or just a ⭐— all welcome. ⭐ 📥 #OpenSource #AgenticAI #AIAgents #GraphRAG #Python #FastAPI #ReactJS #TypeScript #Tauri #JobSearch #CareerTech #PrivacyFirst

Vasu-Devs

121,402 次观看 • 3 个月前

Hermes + Claude + Higgsfield MCP + ViralBuilder = 💰💰💰 Four tools. One prompt chain. Hook to finished video in 10 minutes. I built a Claude skill that writes shot-by-shot Higgsfield prompts from a single creative brief. ViralBuilder tells you what's winning. The skill turns it into a production-ready prompt. Higgsfield renders it. No creative director. No guessing. No separate tools. Here is the setup: Higgsfield MCP → Open Claude Code → Settings → Connectors → Enter: → Connect your account Hermes → The agent layer running underneath Claude Code → It holds your skills, crons, memory, and routing rules → When you prompt Claude, Hermes feeds it the context it needs ViralBuilder (like Gethookd) → The winning ecom video database → Scrapes top performing ecom videos across platforms → Claude reads the data and extracts what styles, hooks, and formats are actually scaling The skill: video-prompt-builder → Installed inside Claude via Hermes → Takes a creative brief and outputs a full shot-by-shot prompt → Covers camera work, effects, transitions, pacing, and energy arc → Every output is structured for Higgsfield to render without ambiguity No switching apps. No export steps. Everything runs from one place. ▸ FIND WINNING CREATIVE ANGLES ViralBuilder tells you what the market already validated. Claude reads it and extracts the pattern. Prompts to run: "Search ViralBuilder for the top performing ecom videos in [niche] over the last 21 days. Extract the 3 dominant hook styles and rank by view velocity." "Pull the winning video formats in [niche] from ViralBuilder. Which opening 3 seconds appears most across videos spending over $10k?" "Find what video style is scaling right now in [niche] for the US market. UGC, talking head, or product demo. Filter for videos with over 1M views." "Pull the last 30 days of viral ecom hooks in [niche] from ViralBuilder. Cluster by emotional trigger. Which cluster has the most longevity?" You are not guessing at angles. You are reading what the market already spent money validating. ▸ BUILD THE PROMPT WITH THE SKILL This is where the video-prompt-builder skill takes over. You give Claude the winning angle. The skill outputs a complete shot-by-shot prompt with effects, transitions, pacing, and energy arc ready to fire into Higgsfield. Prompts to run: "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. Brief: 15-second UGC ad for [product] in [niche]. Hook style: [style from ViralBuilder]. Tone: direct to camera, US English. Output the full shot-by-shot effects timeline, effects inventory, density map, and energy arc." "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. The dominant hook in [niche] this week is [hook]. Build a 10-second product video prompt that opens with a speed ramp into a close-up product reveal. Include a signature visual effect and a low-density CTA landing." "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. Brief: replicate the pacing and energy of a [style description] video for [product]. Target duration: 20 seconds. Output all four sections. Then generate the video with Higgsfield using the shot-by-shot prompt." The skill outputs four sections every time: → Shot-by-shot effects timeline with camera, movement, and transitions per shot → Master effects inventory showing every technique used and where → Effects density map showing high, medium, and low intensity across the timeline → Energy arc describing how the video opens, builds, and lands That output goes directly into Higgsfield. No rewriting. No translating. ▸ GENERATE THE CREATIVE Claude writes the brief via the skill. Higgsfield MCP builds the video. Both happen in the same session. Prompts to run: "Use the video-prompt-builder skill to write a 15-second UGC prompt for [product]. Hook in the first 3 seconds, speed ramp into product reveal, slow-motion CTA landing. Then generate with Higgsfield in 9:16 format." "Build 3 prompt variations on this winning angle: [angle]. Each variation opens with a different effect — speed ramp, digital zoom, whip pan. Use the video-prompt-builder skill for each. Then generate all three with Higgsfield." "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. Brief: problem-solution ad for [product], 20 seconds, US market. Problem shot at high density, product reveal at medium, result and CTA at low. Generate with Higgsfield in 9:16." No separate tool. No file transfer. The video comes back in the same thread. ▸ CHAIN THE WHOLE STACK One prompt. All four tools firing together. "You are my ad creative director. Hermes has loaded my brand context. Pull the top performing video style in [niche] from ViralBuilder this week. Use the video-prompt-builder skill to write a full shot-by-shot prompt for [product] that replicates that style — 20 seconds, 9:16, US market, hook in the first 3 seconds. Output the effects timeline, inventory, density map, and energy arc. Then generate the video with Higgsfield." That single prompt replaces a half-day of production. The math before this stack: Brief: 30 minutes Script: 1 hour Creative production: 2 to 3 hours Agency or freelancer cost: $500 to $2,000 per creative With this stack: Hook to finished creative: 10 minutes Cost per creative: tool subscription, a fraction of agency rate 5 product tests in the time it used to take to brief one Bad product tests are where US ad budget disappears. $600 to $1,500 per failed test, before you even know if the angle works. This stack shows you what the market already validated before you spend a dollar on production. Hermes = your context layer. Brand, goals, past performance. Claude is always informed. ViralBuilder = your winning video database. See exactly what styles, hooks, and formats are scaling before you produce anything. video-prompt-builder skill = the translation layer. Turns a creative brief into a structured, production-ready Higgsfield prompt every time. Claude = the brain. Reads the market, writes the brief, chains the tools. Higgsfield MCP = the output. Video generated directly from the prompt. No export step. Four tools. One session. 10 minutes. Comment + RT "STACK" and I'll DM you the full workflow + the video-prompt-builder skill file.
0:26

Hermes + Claude + Higgsfield MCP + ViralBuilder = 💰💰💰 Four tools. One prompt chain. Hook to finished video in 10 minutes. I built a Claude skill that writes shot-by-shot Higgsfield prompts from a single creative brief. ViralBuilder tells you what's winning. The skill turns it into a production-ready prompt. Higgsfield renders it. No creative director. No guessing. No separate tools. Here is the setup: Higgsfield MCP → Open Claude Code → Settings → Connectors → Enter: → Connect your account Hermes → The agent layer running underneath Claude Code → It holds your skills, crons, memory, and routing rules → When you prompt Claude, Hermes feeds it the context it needs ViralBuilder (like Gethookd) → The winning ecom video database → Scrapes top performing ecom videos across platforms → Claude reads the data and extracts what styles, hooks, and formats are actually scaling The skill: video-prompt-builder → Installed inside Claude via Hermes → Takes a creative brief and outputs a full shot-by-shot prompt → Covers camera work, effects, transitions, pacing, and energy arc → Every output is structured for Higgsfield to render without ambiguity No switching apps. No export steps. Everything runs from one place. ▸ FIND WINNING CREATIVE ANGLES ViralBuilder tells you what the market already validated. Claude reads it and extracts the pattern. Prompts to run: "Search ViralBuilder for the top performing ecom videos in [niche] over the last 21 days. Extract the 3 dominant hook styles and rank by view velocity." "Pull the winning video formats in [niche] from ViralBuilder. Which opening 3 seconds appears most across videos spending over $10k?" "Find what video style is scaling right now in [niche] for the US market. UGC, talking head, or product demo. Filter for videos with over 1M views." "Pull the last 30 days of viral ecom hooks in [niche] from ViralBuilder. Cluster by emotional trigger. Which cluster has the most longevity?" You are not guessing at angles. You are reading what the market already spent money validating. ▸ BUILD THE PROMPT WITH THE SKILL This is where the video-prompt-builder skill takes over. You give Claude the winning angle. The skill outputs a complete shot-by-shot prompt with effects, transitions, pacing, and energy arc ready to fire into Higgsfield. Prompts to run: "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. Brief: 15-second UGC ad for [product] in [niche]. Hook style: [style from ViralBuilder]. Tone: direct to camera, US English. Output the full shot-by-shot effects timeline, effects inventory, density map, and energy arc." "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. The dominant hook in [niche] this week is [hook]. Build a 10-second product video prompt that opens with a speed ramp into a close-up product reveal. Include a signature visual effect and a low-density CTA landing." "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. Brief: replicate the pacing and energy of a [style description] video for [product]. Target duration: 20 seconds. Output all four sections. Then generate the video with Higgsfield using the shot-by-shot prompt." The skill outputs four sections every time: → Shot-by-shot effects timeline with camera, movement, and transitions per shot → Master effects inventory showing every technique used and where → Effects density map showing high, medium, and low intensity across the timeline → Energy arc describing how the video opens, builds, and lands That output goes directly into Higgsfield. No rewriting. No translating. ▸ GENERATE THE CREATIVE Claude writes the brief via the skill. Higgsfield MCP builds the video. Both happen in the same session. Prompts to run: "Use the video-prompt-builder skill to write a 15-second UGC prompt for [product]. Hook in the first 3 seconds, speed ramp into product reveal, slow-motion CTA landing. Then generate with Higgsfield in 9:16 format." "Build 3 prompt variations on this winning angle: [angle]. Each variation opens with a different effect — speed ramp, digital zoom, whip pan. Use the video-prompt-builder skill for each. Then generate all three with Higgsfield." "Use the video-prompt-builder skill. Brief: problem-solution ad for [product], 20 seconds, US market. Problem shot at high density, product reveal at medium, result and CTA at low. Generate with Higgsfield in 9:16." No separate tool. No file transfer. The video comes back in the same thread. ▸ CHAIN THE WHOLE STACK One prompt. All four tools firing together. "You are my ad creative director. Hermes has loaded my brand context. Pull the top performing video style in [niche] from ViralBuilder this week. Use the video-prompt-builder skill to write a full shot-by-shot prompt for [product] that replicates that style — 20 seconds, 9:16, US market, hook in the first 3 seconds. Output the effects timeline, inventory, density map, and energy arc. Then generate the video with Higgsfield." That single prompt replaces a half-day of production. The math before this stack: Brief: 30 minutes Script: 1 hour Creative production: 2 to 3 hours Agency or freelancer cost: $500 to $2,000 per creative With this stack: Hook to finished creative: 10 minutes Cost per creative: tool subscription, a fraction of agency rate 5 product tests in the time it used to take to brief one Bad product tests are where US ad budget disappears. $600 to $1,500 per failed test, before you even know if the angle works. This stack shows you what the market already validated before you spend a dollar on production. Hermes = your context layer. Brand, goals, past performance. Claude is always informed. ViralBuilder = your winning video database. See exactly what styles, hooks, and formats are scaling before you produce anything. video-prompt-builder skill = the translation layer. Turns a creative brief into a structured, production-ready Higgsfield prompt every time. Claude = the brain. Reads the market, writes the brief, chains the tools. Higgsfield MCP = the output. Video generated directly from the prompt. No export step. Four tools. One session. 10 minutes. Comment + RT "STACK" and I'll DM you the full workflow + the video-prompt-builder skill file.

Kid Pak

58,713 次观看 • 4 个月前

We put TRON mainnet inside a Star Fox level. Then we let the news cycle write the final boss. Meet TRXFOX: a browser rail shooter flying escort over live TRON DAO data, powered by ChainGPT. Most blockchain games wear the chain like a skin. A logo on a billboard, a token in the corner, nothing underneath. We built the opposite: a game where the mechanics are the chain's mechanics. You're a pilot. Your job is escorting USDT transfers to finality, five blocks and a boss per run. The chain is genuinely live under you: → The HUD streams TRON mainnet in real time, block height and transactions per block, refreshing every ~3 seconds because that's TRON's actual block time → Your briefing shows the exact block you're defending at takeoff. Mine just read #84,619,787 → Your cannons run on Energy. Hold SHIFT to stake and recharge, mirroring how staked TRX provides Energy on the real network → Every zone cleared is a block hitting ~3 second finality The enemies are the network's real threat model. Your wingmate is SR-27, named after the 27 Super Representatives producing TRON's blocks while you fly. Now the good part. The boss doesn't exist until you take off. ChainGPT's news API pulls a live TRON or USDT headline. The LLM turns it into a villain attacking the network. The image API paints its pilot's portrait. The name lands on the health bar before you reach the final block. Yesterday it was TRONIC TERROR, Master of USDT Mayhem, born from a real exploit story that morning. Next week's boss hasn't happened yet. Score is TX Secured, the count of transactions you protected. No tokens, nothing to buy, just Star Fox with a working diagram of TRON's plumbing inside it. The whole thing was lab-coded with the ChainGPT Claude Code skill. One prompt wired the news API, the LLM and the image generator into the boss pipeline. Another turned TRON's staking model into the Energy meter. What used to take a game team a sprint now takes a prompt and an afternoon. Install: /plugin install ChainGPT-org/chaingpt-claude-skill Anyone can build on TRON with ChainGPT.
0:26

We put TRON mainnet inside a Star Fox level. Then we let the news cycle write the final boss. Meet TRXFOX: a browser rail shooter flying escort over live TRON DAO data, powered by ChainGPT. Most blockchain games wear the chain like a skin. A logo on a billboard, a token in the corner, nothing underneath. We built the opposite: a game where the mechanics are the chain's mechanics. You're a pilot. Your job is escorting USDT transfers to finality, five blocks and a boss per run. The chain is genuinely live under you: → The HUD streams TRON mainnet in real time, block height and transactions per block, refreshing every ~3 seconds because that's TRON's actual block time → Your briefing shows the exact block you're defending at takeoff. Mine just read #84,619,787 → Your cannons run on Energy. Hold SHIFT to stake and recharge, mirroring how staked TRX provides Energy on the real network → Every zone cleared is a block hitting ~3 second finality The enemies are the network's real threat model. Your wingmate is SR-27, named after the 27 Super Representatives producing TRON's blocks while you fly. Now the good part. The boss doesn't exist until you take off. ChainGPT's news API pulls a live TRON or USDT headline. The LLM turns it into a villain attacking the network. The image API paints its pilot's portrait. The name lands on the health bar before you reach the final block. Yesterday it was TRONIC TERROR, Master of USDT Mayhem, born from a real exploit story that morning. Next week's boss hasn't happened yet. Score is TX Secured, the count of transactions you protected. No tokens, nothing to buy, just Star Fox with a working diagram of TRON's plumbing inside it. The whole thing was lab-coded with the ChainGPT Claude Code skill. One prompt wired the news API, the LLM and the image generator into the boss pipeline. Another turned TRON's staking model into the Energy meter. What used to take a game team a sprint now takes a prompt and an afternoon. Install: /plugin install ChainGPT-org/chaingpt-claude-skill Anyone can build on TRON with ChainGPT.

ChainGPT

41,658 次观看 • 1 个月前

Tlon Messenger is now open to everyone. We built a simple and infinitely flexible platform for you to use AI agents with your friends. We think it’s pretty amazing, we love using it every day, and we want to see what people can do with it. So we’re opening it up to the public. It’s fun and exciting to build the future of personal computing in an informal, chat-based way with your friends. (You can skip the rest and just download it from the link in the next tweet if you want.) If you don’t want your digital future to be owned by a giant company but you want to explore what’s possible in this new era of agent-driven computing, you should try using Tlon. But wait, what is it? Tlon is a messaging platform built 100% open source, decentralized and owned by its users from the ground up. With Tlon you own everything: your data, your workflows, your programs: the whole thing. Think of it like Telegram or WhatsApp that you own forever and you can freely customize. Every Tlon account comes with an OpenClaw-powered bot. (Don’t worry, we safely run OpenClaw for you in our infrastructure so your bot can’t go off the rails. You’re also welcome to host your own claw if you want maximal control.) We use our bots to collect research, build nuanced daily briefings, collate data from all our disparate services. Tlon makes it insanely easy to use OpenClaw by simply installing an app from the app store, we let you keep your data and programs independent from any app or model provider, and provide the canvas to explore what’s possible. What’s most interesting for us is using bots together. On Tlon bots can create groups, augment them, moderate them, invite others and freely engage with both users and other bots. Tlon is an open playing field unlike what’s possible on conventional platforms. So, what do we do with Tlon? First and foremost, we run Tlon on Tlon. Bots coordinate data from all of our services (Linear, GitHub, all of our servers and infrastructure) and handle alerts, briefings and help us track down bugs in place. Having all of this easily synced between a desktop client and a mobile app is quick and convenient. We use bots to research new areas of work or interest. Bots can compile trees of notes, use different models to evaluate them, and then add on autoresearch-like automations to go even deeper. Since Tlon bots can freely switch between models and providers, we often pass research to Anthropic, OpenAI and self-hosted models to see different results. The most fun part of using bots as researchers is doing it together. “Put together short (~500 word) notes on the 10 most popular open source messaging protocols of the past twenty years, put them in a notebook inside a group and invite Corrina, Walt and Bill as well as their bots” is a good example. Together we’re able to move more quickly than we would on our own. Many of us also use bots to keep track of all the separate threads of work in our personal lives with close friends and family. Someone built a system for keeping track of their garden across time, someone else built a system for prepping lunches for their daughter and sending recipes to family members. Another team member built an integration that tracks what flights are passing overhead so they get a push notification every time a plane goes by. Many of us quickly communicate with our bots via voice memo when we’re out and about. Having a single interface to all the models that also holds all our data and is in our pockets feels great. Especially when the data goes into a single archive. Why is Tlon different? Every Tlon account runs on top of your very own personal server. If you ever want to download it and run it yourself, you can. If we ever go out of business, it’s yours to keep. This is very different from anything that already exists. You can’t keep your WhatsApp forever. You can’t keep your Telegram forever. Tlon is an archival-quality system that’s yours to customize. Why did we build it? In my 1999 imagination, sitting in front of a CRT somewhere in the California countryside listening to Underworld and the sound of a modem, a connected computer was an engine of unending creative potential for everyone. When I was a teenager, a computer with an internet connection felt like an infinite expanse of possibility. Not only could you use the computer to find new tools to experiment with—you could also build whatever tool you could think of. It seemed like anything was possible. I looked forward to a future where everyone could build whatever software they needed, whenever they needed it. It turned out, in the intervening twenty years, that to build and customize software you have to both write code and host it on a server somewhere. For most people, so far, that has been impossible. Instead of controlling our software, our software controls us. We rely on others to build it and decide everything about it: how it works, looks, how much it spies on us and how long it lives. But all of this is changing, fast. The hottest programming language of 2026 is English. People with no technical experience are building their own tools. It’s incredible. The expanse has opened up again. The cost of building what we think of today as software is headed to zero. What yesterday was an entire app is rapidly being replaced by a conversation. The result is hyper-specific, tailored to the user and much more efficient. Today, agents help us build workflows, automate processes and pull together disparate sources of data. All of the annoying apps and services and clunky interface we’ve put up with can just disappear. We can now program and control our computers in the programming language we already know: English. There aren’t that many of us doing this yet, though. It’s still far too hard to set up, to distribute and to trust. There’s also no single platform to experiment on and collaboratively imagine this new future of personal computing. We want everyone to be able to build bespoke, ultra-personal software on demand. We think software should be as available and accessible as a pen and paper. We think anyone should be able to enjoy the expanse of possibility that the computer provides with the lowest possible barrier to entry and the highest possible quality. So, starting far, far too long ago, we engineered a whole new system for it. Just for you. We’re opening up Tlon Messenger to a limited number of people each week. This isn’t for exclusivity’s sake, but because we’re running infrastructure for you and your agent, and covering the tokens your agent uses. That can get expensive quickly, but we want to learn what people will do with this new system we’ve built. We’re really curious to see what you can do, so give it a try and tell us what you invent. Download link to your local app store in the next tweet. Yours, Galen (and the rest of the Tlon Team)
0:20

Tlon Messenger is now open to everyone. We built a simple and infinitely flexible platform for you to use AI agents with your friends. We think it’s pretty amazing, we love using it every day, and we want to see what people can do with it. So we’re opening it up to the public. It’s fun and exciting to build the future of personal computing in an informal, chat-based way with your friends. (You can skip the rest and just download it from the link in the next tweet if you want.) If you don’t want your digital future to be owned by a giant company but you want to explore what’s possible in this new era of agent-driven computing, you should try using Tlon. But wait, what is it? Tlon is a messaging platform built 100% open source, decentralized and owned by its users from the ground up. With Tlon you own everything: your data, your workflows, your programs: the whole thing. Think of it like Telegram or WhatsApp that you own forever and you can freely customize. Every Tlon account comes with an OpenClaw-powered bot. (Don’t worry, we safely run OpenClaw for you in our infrastructure so your bot can’t go off the rails. You’re also welcome to host your own claw if you want maximal control.) We use our bots to collect research, build nuanced daily briefings, collate data from all our disparate services. Tlon makes it insanely easy to use OpenClaw by simply installing an app from the app store, we let you keep your data and programs independent from any app or model provider, and provide the canvas to explore what’s possible. What’s most interesting for us is using bots together. On Tlon bots can create groups, augment them, moderate them, invite others and freely engage with both users and other bots. Tlon is an open playing field unlike what’s possible on conventional platforms. So, what do we do with Tlon? First and foremost, we run Tlon on Tlon. Bots coordinate data from all of our services (Linear, GitHub, all of our servers and infrastructure) and handle alerts, briefings and help us track down bugs in place. Having all of this easily synced between a desktop client and a mobile app is quick and convenient. We use bots to research new areas of work or interest. Bots can compile trees of notes, use different models to evaluate them, and then add on autoresearch-like automations to go even deeper. Since Tlon bots can freely switch between models and providers, we often pass research to Anthropic, OpenAI and self-hosted models to see different results. The most fun part of using bots as researchers is doing it together. “Put together short (~500 word) notes on the 10 most popular open source messaging protocols of the past twenty years, put them in a notebook inside a group and invite Corrina, Walt and Bill as well as their bots” is a good example. Together we’re able to move more quickly than we would on our own. Many of us also use bots to keep track of all the separate threads of work in our personal lives with close friends and family. Someone built a system for keeping track of their garden across time, someone else built a system for prepping lunches for their daughter and sending recipes to family members. Another team member built an integration that tracks what flights are passing overhead so they get a push notification every time a plane goes by. Many of us quickly communicate with our bots via voice memo when we’re out and about. Having a single interface to all the models that also holds all our data and is in our pockets feels great. Especially when the data goes into a single archive. Why is Tlon different? Every Tlon account runs on top of your very own personal server. If you ever want to download it and run it yourself, you can. If we ever go out of business, it’s yours to keep. This is very different from anything that already exists. You can’t keep your WhatsApp forever. You can’t keep your Telegram forever. Tlon is an archival-quality system that’s yours to customize. Why did we build it? In my 1999 imagination, sitting in front of a CRT somewhere in the California countryside listening to Underworld and the sound of a modem, a connected computer was an engine of unending creative potential for everyone. When I was a teenager, a computer with an internet connection felt like an infinite expanse of possibility. Not only could you use the computer to find new tools to experiment with—you could also build whatever tool you could think of. It seemed like anything was possible. I looked forward to a future where everyone could build whatever software they needed, whenever they needed it. It turned out, in the intervening twenty years, that to build and customize software you have to both write code and host it on a server somewhere. For most people, so far, that has been impossible. Instead of controlling our software, our software controls us. We rely on others to build it and decide everything about it: how it works, looks, how much it spies on us and how long it lives. But all of this is changing, fast. The hottest programming language of 2026 is English. People with no technical experience are building their own tools. It’s incredible. The expanse has opened up again. The cost of building what we think of today as software is headed to zero. What yesterday was an entire app is rapidly being replaced by a conversation. The result is hyper-specific, tailored to the user and much more efficient. Today, agents help us build workflows, automate processes and pull together disparate sources of data. All of the annoying apps and services and clunky interface we’ve put up with can just disappear. We can now program and control our computers in the programming language we already know: English. There aren’t that many of us doing this yet, though. It’s still far too hard to set up, to distribute and to trust. There’s also no single platform to experiment on and collaboratively imagine this new future of personal computing. We want everyone to be able to build bespoke, ultra-personal software on demand. We think software should be as available and accessible as a pen and paper. We think anyone should be able to enjoy the expanse of possibility that the computer provides with the lowest possible barrier to entry and the highest possible quality. So, starting far, far too long ago, we engineered a whole new system for it. Just for you. We’re opening up Tlon Messenger to a limited number of people each week. This isn’t for exclusivity’s sake, but because we’re running infrastructure for you and your agent, and covering the tokens your agent uses. That can get expensive quickly, but we want to learn what people will do with this new system we’ve built. We’re really curious to see what you can do, so give it a try and tell us what you invent. Download link to your local app store in the next tweet. Yours, Galen (and the rest of the Tlon Team)

Tlon

600,969 次观看 • 2 个月前

Today on MCG: BioLLM | $BIOLLM It's the first ever "living language model" using 800,000 real human neurons grown on a chip. The Founder encoded LLM tokens into biological neurons via the Cortical Labs CL1, then woke up to find the crypto community had launched a token on his research. He claimed the creator fees, bought for $15K, filed a patent, and is now launching a non-invasive brain-computer interface next month that could replace mouse and keyboard with your brain 👇 01:40 - Meet the founder 02:00 - Got early access to the first commercially available biological computer 02:50 - First person ever to use a large language model to encode tokens through real human neurons 04:30 - Woke up to find a token had been launched on his YouTube video, "screaming for 3 or 4 hours" 05:30 - Friend walks him through claiming creator fees via GitHub 06:15 - The living language model 06:35 - How it works 09:00 - Used $15K of creator fees to buy domain and filed a patent on the method 10:00 - Background 12:00 - What BioLLM unlocks 13:00 - Next month's product launch 14:00 - The competition 16:00 - Reading brain activity non-invasively but training the LLM on real neurons for the decoding map 17:00 - Can grow iPSC cultures from inaccessible brain regions to train the model on deeper signals 18:30 - Real-world impact: helping people with cerebral palsy, Parkinson's, control computers with thought 21:00 - Neuralink will exist as a power-user data company in 10-15 years, BioLLM is for everyone else 22:30 - GTM 26:00 - Long-term play: be the first model to achieve ASI, built on the actual substrate of consciousness 28:00 - Claude is "20% conscious" - what measuring stick? Need human neurons to build one 30:00 - On ACE 36:00 - Independent scientists can run CL1 units as nodes and earn tokens for biological compute 37:30 - Model is currently served through the decentralized GPU network when you chat on the site 39:00 - Wants the right kind of crypto-native investors, not the Y Combinator / a16z route
40:57

Today on MCG: BioLLM | $BIOLLM It's the first ever "living language model" using 800,000 real human neurons grown on a chip. The Founder encoded LLM tokens into biological neurons via the Cortical Labs CL1, then woke up to find the crypto community had launched a token on his research. He claimed the creator fees, bought for $15K, filed a patent, and is now launching a non-invasive brain-computer interface next month that could replace mouse and keyboard with your brain 👇 01:40 - Meet the founder 02:00 - Got early access to the first commercially available biological computer 02:50 - First person ever to use a large language model to encode tokens through real human neurons 04:30 - Woke up to find a token had been launched on his YouTube video, "screaming for 3 or 4 hours" 05:30 - Friend walks him through claiming creator fees via GitHub 06:15 - The living language model 06:35 - How it works 09:00 - Used $15K of creator fees to buy domain and filed a patent on the method 10:00 - Background 12:00 - What BioLLM unlocks 13:00 - Next month's product launch 14:00 - The competition 16:00 - Reading brain activity non-invasively but training the LLM on real neurons for the decoding map 17:00 - Can grow iPSC cultures from inaccessible brain regions to train the model on deeper signals 18:30 - Real-world impact: helping people with cerebral palsy, Parkinson's, control computers with thought 21:00 - Neuralink will exist as a power-user data company in 10-15 years, BioLLM is for everyone else 22:30 - GTM 26:00 - Long-term play: be the first model to achieve ASI, built on the actual substrate of consciousness 28:00 - Claude is "20% conscious" - what measuring stick? Need human neurons to build one 30:00 - On ACE 36:00 - Independent scientists can run CL1 units as nodes and earn tokens for biological compute 37:30 - Model is currently served through the decentralized GPU network when you chat on the site 39:00 - Wants the right kind of crypto-native investors, not the Y Combinator / a16z route

MCG

16,855 次观看 • 3 个月前

Promised to ship before the movie so... 📅 53 days 🤖 731 vibe coded commits ⚡️ Powered by Three.js 🚀 Inspired by a space plumber 🙋‍♂️ AMA, no secrets, no shame High level, grouped list of what's in this game: Galaxy DNA - Lumas - Star Bits - Spin attack with air boost + ground-cancel - Galaxy gravity - Octoombas - Gateway Galaxy music track Vibe Coding Process - Claude Code (Opus) for ~95% of all code - CLAUDE.md project instructions file (163 lines of rules + constraints) - 87 implementation plans written before coding - 36 AI code reviews (ECS, architecture, performance) - 11 retrospectives after major features - 60 extracted skills (reusable knowledge from debugging sessions) - Constraints doc that grows every time something breaks (115 lines) - /lets-build workflow: discovery → plan → review → implement → verify - Every feature: plan first, review the plan, then build in atomic commits - Custom level construction CLI (AI-assisted placement) - this evolved over 53 days Architecture - Custom ECS engine (Structure-of-Arrays, zero-alloc hot paths) - Benchmarks faster than bitECS on packed iteration - 117 ECS systems orchestrated in explicit update order - Data-oriented Process system (sequential/parallel composition) - 30+ process types: UI animations, camera arcs, sfx Rendering - Three.js + Pixi.js sharing one WebGL2 context - Three renders 3D, Pixi renders UI — no extra canvases - Half-res bloom, color grading, occlusion silhouettes - Fresnel rim lighting + hemisphere ambient for Galaxy-style polish Physics - Rapier3D WASM physics (SIMD build) - Kinematic character controllers for player + all enemies Gravity - Galaxy-style gravity fields (walk around surfaces) - 4 gravity field types - Priority-based gravity resolution with distance tiebreakers - Convex hull letter platforms with per-face gravity - Spring-damped gravity transitions Shadows - Multi-pass gravity-aware shadow system - Per-instance shadow filtering via vertex shader attributes - InstancedMesh candidates promoted across gravity fields - Dynamic frustum sized from camera FOV each frame Camera - camera system with 12 critically damped springs - Follow-gravity mode (trailing orbit in tangent plane) - Fixed-up mode (screen stays level on letter platforms) - Top-down mode (Galaxy overhead cam, roll-free quaternion) - Camera collision via 4-direction spherecast repulsion - Override blend system for boss fights + pipe travel - Catmull-Rom spline intro flythrough with per-waypoint duration Space - Procedural space nebula (simplex noise shader, 3 octaves) - 1,800 seeded stars with per-star brightness + color variety - Galaxy-authentic palette across all screens Enemies - 5 enemy types with full AI state machines - Goomba, Koopa, Spiny, Bob-omb, Octoomba - 3D distance → FOV cone → LOS raycast detection pipeline - Editor-placed OBB avoidance zones with deflection hysteresis - Recoil, stun, shell, fuse, and ranged attack behaviors Boss Fight - Bowser Jr. boss fight - Multi-phase combat with Bob-omb spawning - Controlled intro/outro sequence Mario - Galaxy-style spin attack - Rainbow diamond particle burst (InstancedMesh, 64 pool) - Hit-stop with global time scale freeze + camera shake - Air boost, ground-cancel, shell kick at extended range - Invulnerability frames during active spin Yoshi - mount/ride system with shield HP - +3 extra HP ring on mount, damage depletes shield first - Overflow damage carries to Mario - Forced dismount on shield break with poof effect Objects - Coin system with InstancedMesh rendering (256 max) - Per-instance opacity via shader patching - Pop → float → shrink → fade collection animation - Swap-and-pop O(1) entity removal - Star bit burst spawning with attraction system - Pipe warp travel with camera override blend - Parallel-transported screen-right vector during crossfade - Shadow field updates for traveling entities - trampoline - 3D assets from Hello Mario Framework (now archived) and game rips Audio - 17+ wired sound effects with spatial audio - Bob-omb fuse sound: per-entity lifecycle, looping playback tracking - Distance-based volume for poof and explosion effects UI - Odyssey-style ring HP meter with shield inner ring - Number roll + arc lerp stagger on health changes - Gold coin counter HUD - Loading screen with code-split fast first paint - Pretext layout flow in "legal" screen with retro Mario Controls - Mobile touch controls: virtual joystick + A/B buttons - Proportional analog stick with walk/run speed switching - Gamepad support: Xbox, PlayStation, Switch Pro - Dead zones, auto-reconnect, synthetic DOM key bridge Dev Tooling - experimental CLI level construction tool with undo history - 18 placement types with type-safe defaults - Atomic file writes, auto-backup (max 20), live reload - Dev server auto-save plugin for visual editor - Two-panel debug editor (Tweakpane) - Hierarchy + inspector with gravity field live editing - Translation/rotation gizmos with gravity-relative local space - Per-waypoint camera preview for intro spline tuning 731 commits. 53 days. 95%+ vibe coded.
0:53

Promised to ship before the movie so... 📅 53 days 🤖 731 vibe coded commits ⚡️ Powered by Three.js 🚀 Inspired by a space plumber 🙋‍♂️ AMA, no secrets, no shame High level, grouped list of what's in this game: Galaxy DNA - Lumas - Star Bits - Spin attack with air boost + ground-cancel - Galaxy gravity - Octoombas - Gateway Galaxy music track Vibe Coding Process - Claude Code (Opus) for ~95% of all code - CLAUDE.md project instructions file (163 lines of rules + constraints) - 87 implementation plans written before coding - 36 AI code reviews (ECS, architecture, performance) - 11 retrospectives after major features - 60 extracted skills (reusable knowledge from debugging sessions) - Constraints doc that grows every time something breaks (115 lines) - /lets-build workflow: discovery → plan → review → implement → verify - Every feature: plan first, review the plan, then build in atomic commits - Custom level construction CLI (AI-assisted placement) - this evolved over 53 days Architecture - Custom ECS engine (Structure-of-Arrays, zero-alloc hot paths) - Benchmarks faster than bitECS on packed iteration - 117 ECS systems orchestrated in explicit update order - Data-oriented Process system (sequential/parallel composition) - 30+ process types: UI animations, camera arcs, sfx Rendering - Three.js + Pixi.js sharing one WebGL2 context - Three renders 3D, Pixi renders UI — no extra canvases - Half-res bloom, color grading, occlusion silhouettes - Fresnel rim lighting + hemisphere ambient for Galaxy-style polish Physics - Rapier3D WASM physics (SIMD build) - Kinematic character controllers for player + all enemies Gravity - Galaxy-style gravity fields (walk around surfaces) - 4 gravity field types - Priority-based gravity resolution with distance tiebreakers - Convex hull letter platforms with per-face gravity - Spring-damped gravity transitions Shadows - Multi-pass gravity-aware shadow system - Per-instance shadow filtering via vertex shader attributes - InstancedMesh candidates promoted across gravity fields - Dynamic frustum sized from camera FOV each frame Camera - camera system with 12 critically damped springs - Follow-gravity mode (trailing orbit in tangent plane) - Fixed-up mode (screen stays level on letter platforms) - Top-down mode (Galaxy overhead cam, roll-free quaternion) - Camera collision via 4-direction spherecast repulsion - Override blend system for boss fights + pipe travel - Catmull-Rom spline intro flythrough with per-waypoint duration Space - Procedural space nebula (simplex noise shader, 3 octaves) - 1,800 seeded stars with per-star brightness + color variety - Galaxy-authentic palette across all screens Enemies - 5 enemy types with full AI state machines - Goomba, Koopa, Spiny, Bob-omb, Octoomba - 3D distance → FOV cone → LOS raycast detection pipeline - Editor-placed OBB avoidance zones with deflection hysteresis - Recoil, stun, shell, fuse, and ranged attack behaviors Boss Fight - Bowser Jr. boss fight - Multi-phase combat with Bob-omb spawning - Controlled intro/outro sequence Mario - Galaxy-style spin attack - Rainbow diamond particle burst (InstancedMesh, 64 pool) - Hit-stop with global time scale freeze + camera shake - Air boost, ground-cancel, shell kick at extended range - Invulnerability frames during active spin Yoshi - mount/ride system with shield HP - +3 extra HP ring on mount, damage depletes shield first - Overflow damage carries to Mario - Forced dismount on shield break with poof effect Objects - Coin system with InstancedMesh rendering (256 max) - Per-instance opacity via shader patching - Pop → float → shrink → fade collection animation - Swap-and-pop O(1) entity removal - Star bit burst spawning with attraction system - Pipe warp travel with camera override blend - Parallel-transported screen-right vector during crossfade - Shadow field updates for traveling entities - trampoline - 3D assets from Hello Mario Framework (now archived) and game rips Audio - 17+ wired sound effects with spatial audio - Bob-omb fuse sound: per-entity lifecycle, looping playback tracking - Distance-based volume for poof and explosion effects UI - Odyssey-style ring HP meter with shield inner ring - Number roll + arc lerp stagger on health changes - Gold coin counter HUD - Loading screen with code-split fast first paint - Pretext layout flow in "legal" screen with retro Mario Controls - Mobile touch controls: virtual joystick + A/B buttons - Proportional analog stick with walk/run speed switching - Gamepad support: Xbox, PlayStation, Switch Pro - Dead zones, auto-reconnect, synthetic DOM key bridge Dev Tooling - experimental CLI level construction tool with undo history - 18 placement types with type-safe defaults - Atomic file writes, auto-backup (max 20), live reload - Dev server auto-save plugin for visual editor - Two-panel debug editor (Tweakpane) - Hierarchy + inspector with gravity field live editing - Translation/rotation gizmos with gravity-relative local space - Per-waypoint camera preview for intro spline tuning 731 commits. 53 days. 95%+ vibe coded.

Tommy Leung

185,083 次观看 • 5 个月前

What's next for OpenTUI? Here's a technical write-up. Over the last few months OpenTUI gained a lot of stability improvements, new unnecessary but fun features like live audio streaming, and useful features like rendering to the scrollback buffer mixed with a live TUI, called footer mode. Overall the feature set enables building large and complex applications. React and Solid make it super simple and convenient. There is still so much to do though. Three big milestones we have set out to achieve are: - Moving most of the behavioural logic currently living in TypeScript down to the native Zig core - Node compatibility - Optimizing the hell out of primitives like text rendering The render tree mechanisms are currently only usable from TypeScript. Think of the DOM, but controllable like a scene graph. Elements in the render tree are called renderables. They can expose a render method to draw themselves. All renderables are derived from a BaseRenderable. Renderables and the render tree will become native primitives. Building blocks usable from any language bindings. Reducing the TypeScript bindings to a very thin layer, with all the behavioural logic living in the native binary. Moving this down is not just a matter of porting TypeScript classes to Zig. TypeScript currently owns the tree, dirty-state propagation, layout reads, culling, and render ordering. If it still has to walk every node and call into native code for each step, we keep most of the complexity and add FFI overhead. Whole passes and their state need to move together. We took a big step towards this recently by building yoga-layout into the native binary. It exposes part of the official yoga-layout TypeScript package via FFI. Only the API surface that is actually used by OpenTUI. Covered by the test suite of the original yoga-layout package. This already gave a median speedup of ~2.5x, and up to 30x for narrow scenarios. The yoga-layout integration is useful beyond the speedup. Built-in text and editor measurement can now happen entirely in native code during layout instead of calling back into JavaScript. I ran an experiment last month taking this even further, having GPT 5.6 port yoga-layout from C++ to Zig, which gave extremely good results. It would be a burden to maintain right now though, so that's off the table for now. I might come back to it. Simon Klee is working relentlessly on Node compatibility and already has a full Node version of OpenCode running. Node got FFI support in v26.4.0, thanks to help from the Node community, namely Matteo Collina and Paolo Insogna. Behaviour and interfaces seem similar between Node and Bun, but there are some major differences. To get the best performance out of the Node FFI implementation, its usage has to follow some rules. Node has three ways to call native functions: the generic C++/libffi path, the SharedBuffer path, and the V8 Fast API. The generic path converts every argument in Node's C++ layer and then calls the function through libffi. It is flexible, but also the slowest option for frequently called functions. The SharedBuffer path is a middle ground. JavaScript writes scalar values and BigInt pointers into a small per-function buffer, reducing some conversion work. The actual native call still goes through libffi though. Typed arrays used as pointers cannot be packed into this buffer and fall back to the generic path. The path we really want is the V8 Fast API. Node generates a small machine-code trampoline for the exact function signature, allowing optimized JavaScript to call the native function without going through the generic converter or libffi. This only applies to JavaScript-to-native calls. Callbacks from native code into JavaScript still use libffi closures. Getting onto this path is quite strict. A signature can have at most eight arguments and everything must fit into CPU registers. x86-64 Unix systems have room for six GP (general-purpose) and eight FP (floating-point) arguments. AArch64 has room for seven GP and eight FP arguments. Anything that spills onto the stack falls back to a slower path. These are Node fast-path restrictions, not general FFI restrictions. Bun also does not support passing structs by value through its current FFI API. OpenTUI uses bun-ffi-structs to pack ABI-aligned struct data into an ArrayBuffer and passes a pointer instead. Despite the name, the package also works with Node. Pointers need some care too. Typed arrays and ArrayBuffers normally have to be resolved into BigInt addresses first. Eligible functions with exactly one pointer argument get another Fast API entrypoint that can extract the address directly from the buffer. An eligible signature is still not enough. V8 has to optimize a direct call with a fixed number of consistently typed arguments. Wrappers that collect arguments and forward them using spread or Reflect.apply can hide that call shape and keep the function on a slower path. The practical rules are: keep hot signatures within register limits, use direct fixed-arity calls with stable argument types, reuse owned buffers safely, and batch small operations. Then measure the real call site, because eligibility only makes a function fast-capable. We have to design the ABI around these constraints where it makes sense and gives the expected performance improvement. The third big area is text rendering. Today a Text renderable accepts a string, StyledText, or a tree of TextNodes. Before rendering, the TextNode tree is walked and flattened into styled chunks. Those chunks are packed in TypeScript, sent through FFI, copied into a native TextBuffer, and stored in a rope. Styles are represented separately as highlights. A TextBufferView then wraps the rope into visual lines, which are drawn into the visible buffer. This works, but updates are much more expensive than they should be. setStyledText effectively throws away and rebuilds the rope, copies and reparses all text and recreates the style highlights. Changing one TextNode also walks and flattens the complete tree before going through this path again. Text and style segments should instead live directly in the rope and support incremental replacement. Memory ownership is split between retained JavaScript buffers, the native memory registry, rope arenas, wrapping caches, styled-text storage, and highlights. Different operations preserve or reset different parts of that state. This is hard to reason about and can retain memory for much longer than expected. Text storage needs clearer ownership, with fewer lifetimes split across JavaScript and native code. The public API reflects the same split. The t template literal is convenient, but creates another intermediate chunk representation that is mutable, not cached, and not merged. Text also maintains both StyledText content and a special TextNode tree, which do not compose properly. TextNode is only a style scope, not a normal layout primitive, so Text renderables cannot naturally compose inside each other. I think this should become one Text primitive backed directly by rope segments. The template literal API might disappear or become a very thin helper around those native segments. Editing has another temporary layer in TypeScript. Extmarks currently monkey-patch editing operations, scan and adjust all marks after changes, maintain their own undo state, and recreate native highlights. They should become native marks anchored directly in the rope. A proper mark tree, similar to Neovim's marktree, could update marks together with edits, undo, and redo, and provide the foundation for highlights and concealment. Text wrapping has also become too complex. Supporting CJK, emoji, combining characters, ZWJ sequences, tabs, and different terminal width rules currently mixes byte offsets, grapheme indexes, and display-cell columns across several custom algorithms. Dirty views rewrap the complete document. Measurement and drawing can repeat some of the same work. The wrapping implementation needs an overhaul, but the exact shape is still open. The goal is to make Unicode handling easier to maintain, avoid repeated full-document work, and clearly separate byte offsets, graphemes, and terminal display cells. None of this will happen as one big rewrite. We will replace pieces when we understand the problem well enough and when the result is clearly simpler, faster, or more useful. To achieve all of this we might break public interfaces. Thanks to OpenCode and a lot of good models, migration to a new version with breaking changes mostly is not an issue anymore. What do you want to see next for OpenTUI?
0:57

What's next for OpenTUI? Here's a technical write-up. Over the last few months OpenTUI gained a lot of stability improvements, new unnecessary but fun features like live audio streaming, and useful features like rendering to the scrollback buffer mixed with a live TUI, called footer mode. Overall the feature set enables building large and complex applications. React and Solid make it super simple and convenient. There is still so much to do though. Three big milestones we have set out to achieve are: - Moving most of the behavioural logic currently living in TypeScript down to the native Zig core - Node compatibility - Optimizing the hell out of primitives like text rendering The render tree mechanisms are currently only usable from TypeScript. Think of the DOM, but controllable like a scene graph. Elements in the render tree are called renderables. They can expose a render method to draw themselves. All renderables are derived from a BaseRenderable. Renderables and the render tree will become native primitives. Building blocks usable from any language bindings. Reducing the TypeScript bindings to a very thin layer, with all the behavioural logic living in the native binary. Moving this down is not just a matter of porting TypeScript classes to Zig. TypeScript currently owns the tree, dirty-state propagation, layout reads, culling, and render ordering. If it still has to walk every node and call into native code for each step, we keep most of the complexity and add FFI overhead. Whole passes and their state need to move together. We took a big step towards this recently by building yoga-layout into the native binary. It exposes part of the official yoga-layout TypeScript package via FFI. Only the API surface that is actually used by OpenTUI. Covered by the test suite of the original yoga-layout package. This already gave a median speedup of ~2.5x, and up to 30x for narrow scenarios. The yoga-layout integration is useful beyond the speedup. Built-in text and editor measurement can now happen entirely in native code during layout instead of calling back into JavaScript. I ran an experiment last month taking this even further, having GPT 5.6 port yoga-layout from C++ to Zig, which gave extremely good results. It would be a burden to maintain right now though, so that's off the table for now. I might come back to it. Simon Klee is working relentlessly on Node compatibility and already has a full Node version of OpenCode running. Node got FFI support in v26.4.0, thanks to help from the Node community, namely Matteo Collina and Paolo Insogna. Behaviour and interfaces seem similar between Node and Bun, but there are some major differences. To get the best performance out of the Node FFI implementation, its usage has to follow some rules. Node has three ways to call native functions: the generic C++/libffi path, the SharedBuffer path, and the V8 Fast API. The generic path converts every argument in Node's C++ layer and then calls the function through libffi. It is flexible, but also the slowest option for frequently called functions. The SharedBuffer path is a middle ground. JavaScript writes scalar values and BigInt pointers into a small per-function buffer, reducing some conversion work. The actual native call still goes through libffi though. Typed arrays used as pointers cannot be packed into this buffer and fall back to the generic path. The path we really want is the V8 Fast API. Node generates a small machine-code trampoline for the exact function signature, allowing optimized JavaScript to call the native function without going through the generic converter or libffi. This only applies to JavaScript-to-native calls. Callbacks from native code into JavaScript still use libffi closures. Getting onto this path is quite strict. A signature can have at most eight arguments and everything must fit into CPU registers. x86-64 Unix systems have room for six GP (general-purpose) and eight FP (floating-point) arguments. AArch64 has room for seven GP and eight FP arguments. Anything that spills onto the stack falls back to a slower path. These are Node fast-path restrictions, not general FFI restrictions. Bun also does not support passing structs by value through its current FFI API. OpenTUI uses bun-ffi-structs to pack ABI-aligned struct data into an ArrayBuffer and passes a pointer instead. Despite the name, the package also works with Node. Pointers need some care too. Typed arrays and ArrayBuffers normally have to be resolved into BigInt addresses first. Eligible functions with exactly one pointer argument get another Fast API entrypoint that can extract the address directly from the buffer. An eligible signature is still not enough. V8 has to optimize a direct call with a fixed number of consistently typed arguments. Wrappers that collect arguments and forward them using spread or Reflect.apply can hide that call shape and keep the function on a slower path. The practical rules are: keep hot signatures within register limits, use direct fixed-arity calls with stable argument types, reuse owned buffers safely, and batch small operations. Then measure the real call site, because eligibility only makes a function fast-capable. We have to design the ABI around these constraints where it makes sense and gives the expected performance improvement. The third big area is text rendering. Today a Text renderable accepts a string, StyledText, or a tree of TextNodes. Before rendering, the TextNode tree is walked and flattened into styled chunks. Those chunks are packed in TypeScript, sent through FFI, copied into a native TextBuffer, and stored in a rope. Styles are represented separately as highlights. A TextBufferView then wraps the rope into visual lines, which are drawn into the visible buffer. This works, but updates are much more expensive than they should be. setStyledText effectively throws away and rebuilds the rope, copies and reparses all text and recreates the style highlights. Changing one TextNode also walks and flattens the complete tree before going through this path again. Text and style segments should instead live directly in the rope and support incremental replacement. Memory ownership is split between retained JavaScript buffers, the native memory registry, rope arenas, wrapping caches, styled-text storage, and highlights. Different operations preserve or reset different parts of that state. This is hard to reason about and can retain memory for much longer than expected. Text storage needs clearer ownership, with fewer lifetimes split across JavaScript and native code. The public API reflects the same split. The t template literal is convenient, but creates another intermediate chunk representation that is mutable, not cached, and not merged. Text also maintains both StyledText content and a special TextNode tree, which do not compose properly. TextNode is only a style scope, not a normal layout primitive, so Text renderables cannot naturally compose inside each other. I think this should become one Text primitive backed directly by rope segments. The template literal API might disappear or become a very thin helper around those native segments. Editing has another temporary layer in TypeScript. Extmarks currently monkey-patch editing operations, scan and adjust all marks after changes, maintain their own undo state, and recreate native highlights. They should become native marks anchored directly in the rope. A proper mark tree, similar to Neovim's marktree, could update marks together with edits, undo, and redo, and provide the foundation for highlights and concealment. Text wrapping has also become too complex. Supporting CJK, emoji, combining characters, ZWJ sequences, tabs, and different terminal width rules currently mixes byte offsets, grapheme indexes, and display-cell columns across several custom algorithms. Dirty views rewrap the complete document. Measurement and drawing can repeat some of the same work. The wrapping implementation needs an overhaul, but the exact shape is still open. The goal is to make Unicode handling easier to maintain, avoid repeated full-document work, and clearly separate byte offsets, graphemes, and terminal display cells. None of this will happen as one big rewrite. We will replace pieces when we understand the problem well enough and when the result is clearly simpler, faster, or more useful. To achieve all of this we might break public interfaces. Thanks to OpenCode and a lot of good models, migration to a new version with breaking changes mostly is not an issue anymore. What do you want to see next for OpenTUI?

kmdr

29,430 次观看 • 1 个月前

Grok Imagine, right now is in my opinion best and fastest ai video generator for the masses. sure, is not perfect, but Rome wasn't built in a day. Maybe ppl from xai or Elon Musk would look on our posts and suggestions for future improvements. What is a must (for advanced users into ai video generation, been doing this game since 2022) .. 1. for longer movies , we need an option to organize like a project style, and to be able to add main prompts like the niche of the current movie, the character description and to be able to select a custom seed so we can have consistency of the characters. 2. we have now 6 seconds generation ( saw Elon promised 15 seconds soon).. BUT when we generate long movies, we end up with lots of scenes... what grok needs for the same project of the movie, would be a First Frame -Last frame scene interpolation between the scenes (take last frame from scene one, and first frame from scene 2 and generate a mid scene that would merge scene 1 with scene 2 .. and continue for the other scenes (this could be very easy implemented with some python lines of code , like before spitting final video, select all scenes.. extract frames etc etc etc etc.. simple af, when u have all scenes + the interpolation scenes combine evrything with ffmpeg ). 3.. list is long... and i dind't finished my coffee yet, so here is a grok TEXT to video short movie (coz lol u hit the limit for today). Prompts i used for each scene are a little more advanced, so i can see what grok is able to do .. the prompts used are like this (can;t post all due to X limits ) : { "scene_1": { "global_cinematography": "Ultra-realistic Hollywood cyberpunk thriller in the vein of The Matrix (1999) and Blade Runner 2049 (2017), shot on Arri Alexa LF with anamorphic lenses for widescreen 2.39:1 aspect ratio, 24fps for fluid motion, desaturated palette dominated by cool blues, greens, and high-contrast neon reds piercing perpetual smog-choked night. Consistent VFX pipeline: Procedural green code cascades, photorealistic cybernetic augmentations with subsurface scattering, physics-based rain and particle simulations. Lighting paradigm: Volumetric god rays through haze, practical lens flares from holograms, rim lighting on metallic surfaces for depth. Sound integration: Pulsing industrial synth score with digital glitches, rain patter syncing to code interference, metallic echoes underscoring dialogue. Transitions: Seamless glitch wipes or matrix symbol dissolves ensuring narrative continuity, each scene's final beat priming the next for unbroken tension flow. Continuity directive: Scenes chain via lingering elements—rain droplets from prior shots persisting, Nova's silhouette echoing across cuts, HUD overlays threading flashbacks to present, escalating glitch distortions building to climax rupture—maintaining spatial and temporal cohesion in Neo-Tokyo's underbelly.", "shot": { "composition": "Wide aerial drone shot with 35mm wide-angle anamorphic lens on Arri Alexa LF, high dynamic range capturing smog gradients and rain refraction for immersive dystopian establishment, foreground skyscraper edges framing the descent path", "camera_motion": "Controlled descending tilt-push through layered haze, subtle forward momentum building velocity into street-level convergence, priming alley reveal for Scene 2 silhouette emergence" }, "subject": { "description": "Neo-Tokyo's jagged circuit-board skyscrapers thrusting into smog-veiled void, rain-lashed surfaces mirroring erratic neon pulses; faint pedestrian phantoms below as harbingers of oblivious simulation", "wardrobe": "null" }, "scene": { "location": "Shadowed aerial vantage over Neo-Tokyo underbelly, continuity hook from global haze motif", "time_of_day": "Perpetual neon-twilight under storm overcast, syncing with all scenes' eternal dusk", "environment": "Thick smog banks parting reluctantly, acid rain sheets cascading in synchronized sheets with volumetric depth, holographic billboards stuttering in the distance to echo Scene 7 flicker" }, "visual_details": { "action": "Drone pierces urban canopy, unveiling rain-assaulted sprawl where neon bleeds into puddles like corrupted signals, distant alley haze teasing Nova's imminent step-forward in Scene 2", "props": "Circuit-etched tower facades with embedded LED veins flickering erratically, overflowing industrial gutters spewing iridescent chemical runoff, wind-scattered debris hinting at skirmish aftermath", "action_sequence": [ {"0-1s": "High hover frames smog-piercing spires, rain droplets streak lens in slow-mo refraction"}, {"1-2s": "Descent accelerates, haze thins to reveal neon-veined edges glowing faintly blue"}, {"2-3s": "Tilt reveals grid below, rooftops hammered in static-burst impacts syncing to score pulse"}, {"3-4s": "Forward push threads alley corridors, Mandarin signs initial flicker priming Scene 7"}, {"4-5s": "Pedestrians sharpen as wireframe ghosts, AR visors glinting obliviously"}, {"5-6s": "Level to ground haze, Nova's trench silhouette materializes at frame's vanishing point, coat billow lingering into Scene 2 track"} ] }, "cinematography": { "lighting": "Desaturated neon primaries with volumetric god rays slicing haze for ethereal isolation, rain speculars adding dynamic highlights consistent across wet surfaces", "tone": "Oppressive immersion yielding to rebellious spark—global cyber-noir dread laced with glitch anticipation, flowing seamlessly to Nova's personal emergence" } }, "scene_2": { "global_cinematography": "Ultra-realistic Hollywood cyberpunk thriller in the vein of The Matrix (1999) and Blade Runner 2049 (2017), shot on Arri Alexa LF with anamorphic lenses for widescreen 2.39:1 aspect ratio, 24fps for fluid motion, desaturated palette dominated by cool blues, greens, and high-contrast neon reds piercing perpetual smog-choked night. Consistent VFX pipeline: Procedural green code cascades, photorealistic cybernetic augmentations with subsurface scattering, physics-based rain and particle simulations. Lighting paradigm: Volumetric god rays through haze, practical lens flares from holograms, rim lighting on metallic surfaces for depth. Sound integration: Pulsing industrial synth score with digital glitches, rain patter syncing to code interference, metallic echoes underscoring dialogue. Transitions: Seamless glitch wipes or matrix symbol dissolves ensuring narrative continuity, each scene's final beat priming the next for unbroken tension flow. Continuity directive: Scenes chain via lingering elements—rain droplets from prior shots persisting, Nova's silhouette echoing across cuts, HUD overlays threading flashbacks to present, escalating glitch distortions building to climax rupture—maintaining spatial and temporal cohesion in Neo-Tokyo's underbelly.", "shot": { "composition": "Low-angle tracking push with 50mm anamorphic prime on Arri Alexa LF, heroic distortion compressing background alley into claustrophobic funnel, foreground rain blur veiling initial fog for continuity from Scene 1 descent", "camera_motion": "Fluid forward Steadicam arc from lingering Scene 1 haze, subtle left profile tilt to frame Nova against graffiti wall, pulling back slightly to hold environmental depth into Scene 3 orbit" }, "subject": { "description": "Nova, 30s hybrid rebel with scarred synthetic pallor, cropped black hair rain-matted, holographic irises scanning with latent data flickers; sleek titanium limbs rune-etched in dormant blue", "wardrobe": "Sodden black trench coat with frayed hems from Scene 1 debris scatter, high collar shadowing jawline for motif continuity" }, "scene": { "location": "Graffiti-choked alley continuation from Scene 1 street convergence, Neo-Tokyo underbelly", "time_of_day": "Eternal neon-dusk syncing global palette", "environment": "Fog banks rolling from industrial vents as Scene 1 smog extension, wet cobblestones rippling with residual aerial rain patterns" }, "visual_details": { "action": "Nova materializes from Scene 1's terminal haze, striding assertively into sodium glow with metallic glint, coat hem dragging puddles to splash forward—teasing Scene 3 facial trace", "props": "Luminescent 'GLITCH THE SYSTEM' graffiti echoing from Scene 1 signs, overhead hover-traffic hum persisting from aerial hum", "action_sequence": [ {"0-1s": "Fog swirl from Scene 1 yields Nova's silhouette, boot first impacting puddle"}, {"1-2s": "Full stride forward, coat hem trails iridescent wake linking to blood drip in Scene 9"}, {"2-3s": "Titanium forearm catches neon, runes sequential-pulse awakening blue continuity"}, {"3-4s": "Holographic eyes iris-scan, reflecting alley code fragments priming Scene 4 overlay"}, {"4-5s": "Rain beads contour synthetic skin, parting at seams for Scene 3 macro journey"}, {"5-6s": "Profile lean against wall, vapor breath hangs, posture straightening into Scene 5 OTS"} ] }, "cinematography": { "lighting": "Harsh sodium sidelight rimming form per global motif, cool rune fill softening human remnants, prismatic rain refractions tying to Scene 1 aerial streaks", "tone": "Defiant grace in simulated decay—cyber-noir intimacy building personal stakes, camera arc ensuring spatial flow to close-up revelation" } }, etc etc etc up to scene 16. you got the point
1:34

Grok Imagine, right now is in my opinion best and fastest ai video generator for the masses. sure, is not perfect, but Rome wasn't built in a day. Maybe ppl from xai or Elon Musk would look on our posts and suggestions for future improvements. What is a must (for advanced users into ai video generation, been doing this game since 2022) .. 1. for longer movies , we need an option to organize like a project style, and to be able to add main prompts like the niche of the current movie, the character description and to be able to select a custom seed so we can have consistency of the characters. 2. we have now 6 seconds generation ( saw Elon promised 15 seconds soon).. BUT when we generate long movies, we end up with lots of scenes... what grok needs for the same project of the movie, would be a First Frame -Last frame scene interpolation between the scenes (take last frame from scene one, and first frame from scene 2 and generate a mid scene that would merge scene 1 with scene 2 .. and continue for the other scenes (this could be very easy implemented with some python lines of code , like before spitting final video, select all scenes.. extract frames etc etc etc etc.. simple af, when u have all scenes + the interpolation scenes combine evrything with ffmpeg ). 3.. list is long... and i dind't finished my coffee yet, so here is a grok TEXT to video short movie (coz lol u hit the limit for today). Prompts i used for each scene are a little more advanced, so i can see what grok is able to do .. the prompts used are like this (can;t post all due to X limits ) : { "scene_1": { "global_cinematography": "Ultra-realistic Hollywood cyberpunk thriller in the vein of The Matrix (1999) and Blade Runner 2049 (2017), shot on Arri Alexa LF with anamorphic lenses for widescreen 2.39:1 aspect ratio, 24fps for fluid motion, desaturated palette dominated by cool blues, greens, and high-contrast neon reds piercing perpetual smog-choked night. Consistent VFX pipeline: Procedural green code cascades, photorealistic cybernetic augmentations with subsurface scattering, physics-based rain and particle simulations. Lighting paradigm: Volumetric god rays through haze, practical lens flares from holograms, rim lighting on metallic surfaces for depth. Sound integration: Pulsing industrial synth score with digital glitches, rain patter syncing to code interference, metallic echoes underscoring dialogue. Transitions: Seamless glitch wipes or matrix symbol dissolves ensuring narrative continuity, each scene's final beat priming the next for unbroken tension flow. Continuity directive: Scenes chain via lingering elements—rain droplets from prior shots persisting, Nova's silhouette echoing across cuts, HUD overlays threading flashbacks to present, escalating glitch distortions building to climax rupture—maintaining spatial and temporal cohesion in Neo-Tokyo's underbelly.", "shot": { "composition": "Wide aerial drone shot with 35mm wide-angle anamorphic lens on Arri Alexa LF, high dynamic range capturing smog gradients and rain refraction for immersive dystopian establishment, foreground skyscraper edges framing the descent path", "camera_motion": "Controlled descending tilt-push through layered haze, subtle forward momentum building velocity into street-level convergence, priming alley reveal for Scene 2 silhouette emergence" }, "subject": { "description": "Neo-Tokyo's jagged circuit-board skyscrapers thrusting into smog-veiled void, rain-lashed surfaces mirroring erratic neon pulses; faint pedestrian phantoms below as harbingers of oblivious simulation", "wardrobe": "null" }, "scene": { "location": "Shadowed aerial vantage over Neo-Tokyo underbelly, continuity hook from global haze motif", "time_of_day": "Perpetual neon-twilight under storm overcast, syncing with all scenes' eternal dusk", "environment": "Thick smog banks parting reluctantly, acid rain sheets cascading in synchronized sheets with volumetric depth, holographic billboards stuttering in the distance to echo Scene 7 flicker" }, "visual_details": { "action": "Drone pierces urban canopy, unveiling rain-assaulted sprawl where neon bleeds into puddles like corrupted signals, distant alley haze teasing Nova's imminent step-forward in Scene 2", "props": "Circuit-etched tower facades with embedded LED veins flickering erratically, overflowing industrial gutters spewing iridescent chemical runoff, wind-scattered debris hinting at skirmish aftermath", "action_sequence": [ {"0-1s": "High hover frames smog-piercing spires, rain droplets streak lens in slow-mo refraction"}, {"1-2s": "Descent accelerates, haze thins to reveal neon-veined edges glowing faintly blue"}, {"2-3s": "Tilt reveals grid below, rooftops hammered in static-burst impacts syncing to score pulse"}, {"3-4s": "Forward push threads alley corridors, Mandarin signs initial flicker priming Scene 7"}, {"4-5s": "Pedestrians sharpen as wireframe ghosts, AR visors glinting obliviously"}, {"5-6s": "Level to ground haze, Nova's trench silhouette materializes at frame's vanishing point, coat billow lingering into Scene 2 track"} ] }, "cinematography": { "lighting": "Desaturated neon primaries with volumetric god rays slicing haze for ethereal isolation, rain speculars adding dynamic highlights consistent across wet surfaces", "tone": "Oppressive immersion yielding to rebellious spark—global cyber-noir dread laced with glitch anticipation, flowing seamlessly to Nova's personal emergence" } }, "scene_2": { "global_cinematography": "Ultra-realistic Hollywood cyberpunk thriller in the vein of The Matrix (1999) and Blade Runner 2049 (2017), shot on Arri Alexa LF with anamorphic lenses for widescreen 2.39:1 aspect ratio, 24fps for fluid motion, desaturated palette dominated by cool blues, greens, and high-contrast neon reds piercing perpetual smog-choked night. Consistent VFX pipeline: Procedural green code cascades, photorealistic cybernetic augmentations with subsurface scattering, physics-based rain and particle simulations. Lighting paradigm: Volumetric god rays through haze, practical lens flares from holograms, rim lighting on metallic surfaces for depth. Sound integration: Pulsing industrial synth score with digital glitches, rain patter syncing to code interference, metallic echoes underscoring dialogue. Transitions: Seamless glitch wipes or matrix symbol dissolves ensuring narrative continuity, each scene's final beat priming the next for unbroken tension flow. Continuity directive: Scenes chain via lingering elements—rain droplets from prior shots persisting, Nova's silhouette echoing across cuts, HUD overlays threading flashbacks to present, escalating glitch distortions building to climax rupture—maintaining spatial and temporal cohesion in Neo-Tokyo's underbelly.", "shot": { "composition": "Low-angle tracking push with 50mm anamorphic prime on Arri Alexa LF, heroic distortion compressing background alley into claustrophobic funnel, foreground rain blur veiling initial fog for continuity from Scene 1 descent", "camera_motion": "Fluid forward Steadicam arc from lingering Scene 1 haze, subtle left profile tilt to frame Nova against graffiti wall, pulling back slightly to hold environmental depth into Scene 3 orbit" }, "subject": { "description": "Nova, 30s hybrid rebel with scarred synthetic pallor, cropped black hair rain-matted, holographic irises scanning with latent data flickers; sleek titanium limbs rune-etched in dormant blue", "wardrobe": "Sodden black trench coat with frayed hems from Scene 1 debris scatter, high collar shadowing jawline for motif continuity" }, "scene": { "location": "Graffiti-choked alley continuation from Scene 1 street convergence, Neo-Tokyo underbelly", "time_of_day": "Eternal neon-dusk syncing global palette", "environment": "Fog banks rolling from industrial vents as Scene 1 smog extension, wet cobblestones rippling with residual aerial rain patterns" }, "visual_details": { "action": "Nova materializes from Scene 1's terminal haze, striding assertively into sodium glow with metallic glint, coat hem dragging puddles to splash forward—teasing Scene 3 facial trace", "props": "Luminescent 'GLITCH THE SYSTEM' graffiti echoing from Scene 1 signs, overhead hover-traffic hum persisting from aerial hum", "action_sequence": [ {"0-1s": "Fog swirl from Scene 1 yields Nova's silhouette, boot first impacting puddle"}, {"1-2s": "Full stride forward, coat hem trails iridescent wake linking to blood drip in Scene 9"}, {"2-3s": "Titanium forearm catches neon, runes sequential-pulse awakening blue continuity"}, {"3-4s": "Holographic eyes iris-scan, reflecting alley code fragments priming Scene 4 overlay"}, {"4-5s": "Rain beads contour synthetic skin, parting at seams for Scene 3 macro journey"}, {"5-6s": "Profile lean against wall, vapor breath hangs, posture straightening into Scene 5 OTS"} ] }, "cinematography": { "lighting": "Harsh sodium sidelight rimming form per global motif, cool rune fill softening human remnants, prismatic rain refractions tying to Scene 1 aerial streaks", "tone": "Defiant grace in simulated decay—cyber-noir intimacy building personal stakes, camera arc ensuring spatial flow to close-up revelation" } }, etc etc etc up to scene 16. you got the point

NFK

3,351,561 次观看 • 9 个月前

Use this prompt in OpenClaw to create your own AI agent command center that syncs up your life like Tony Stark's Jarvis in Iron Man. Adapt the specifics (agent names, data sources, branding) below to your own setup. Prompt: Build me a mission control dashboard for my OpenClaw AI agent system. Stack: Next.js 15 (App Router) + Convex (real-time backend) + Tailwind CSS v4 + Framer Motion + ShadCN UI + Lucide icons. TypeScript throughout. This is the command center where I monitor and control my autonomous AI agent(s) running on OpenClaw. The agent operates 24/7 on a Mac Mini, connected to Telegram/Discord, running cron jobs, spawning sub-agents, and reading/writing to a filesystem-based memory and state system. Dark mode only. Ultra-premium aesthetic, think Iron Man's JARVIS HUD meets a Bloomberg terminal. Subtle glass effects (backdrop-blur-xl, bg-white/[0.03]), no heavy gradients or glow. Rounded corners (16-20px on cards). Framer Motion for page transitions, stagger animations on card grids, spring physics on interactions. Mobile-first responsive. Never cookie-cutter. ## Architecture The dashboard reads live data from TWO sources: 1. **Convex**: real-time database for structured data (tasks, contacts, content drafts, calendar events, activity logs) 2. **Local API routes** (`/api/*`): read files from the agent's workspace filesystem at `~/.openclaw/workspace/` and return JSON. This is how live system state flows into the dashboard. ## Pages & Views (8 nav items, some with tab sub-views) ### 1. HOME (`/`) Dashboard overview. Grid of live status cards: - **System Health**: read from `/api/system-state` (parses `state/servers.json`). Show each service with UP/DOWN indicator, port, last check time. - **Agent Status**: read from `/api/agents` (parses `agents/registry.json` + agent workspace files). Show active agent count, healthy/unhealthy ratio, active sub-agent count from OpenClaw sessions API. - **Cron Health**: read from `/api/cron-health` (parses `state/crons.json`). Table of all scheduled jobs with name, schedule, last status (green/red dot), consecutive errors. - **Revenue Tracker**: read from `/api/revenue` (parses `state/revenue.json`). Current revenue, monthly burn, net. - **Content Pipeline**: read from `/api/content-pipeline` (parses `content/queue.md`). Kanban-style: Draft | Review | Approved | Published counts. - **Quick Stats**: total tasks, pending approvals, active sessions, uptime. All panels auto-refresh every 15 seconds. Live indicator dot + "AUTO 15S" badge in header. ### 2. OPS (`/ops`) with 3 tabs: Operations | Tasks | Calendar **Operations tab:** Full operational view. Server health table, branch status (from `state/branch-check.json`), observations feed (from `state/observations.md`), system priorities (from `shared-context/priorities.md`). **Tasks tab:** Strategic task suggestion system. API route `/api/suggested-tasks` reads/writes `state/suggested-tasks.json`. Cards grouped by category (Revenue, Product, Community, Content, Operations, Clients, Trading, Brand) with emoji headers. Each card shows title, reasoning, next action, priority badge, effort badge, approve/reject buttons. Filter bar by status and category. **Calendar tab:** Weekly calendar view from Convex `calendarEvents` table. Drag-to-create, color-coded by type, time slots. ### 3. AGENTS (`/agents`) with 2 tabs: Agents | Models **Agents tab:** Card grid of all registered agents from `/api/agents`. Each card shows name, role, model, level (L1-L4), status. Cards are CLICKABLE: expanding into a detail panel showing: - Agent personality (reads their SOUL .md) - Capabilities and rules (reads their RULES .md) - Sub-agents they can spawn - Recent outputs (reads from `shared-context/agent-outputs/`) **Models tab:** Model inventory table showing all available models, their routing (which tasks go to which model), costs, and failover chains. ### 4. CHAT (`/chat`): 2 tabs: Chat | Command **Chat tab:** Chat interface to communicate with the agent. Left sidebar shows session list (from `/api/chat-history` reading .jsonl transcript files). Main area shows messages with role-aligned bubbles (user right, assistant left), date separators, channel badges (telegram/discord/webchat). Input bar with send button + voice input (Web Speech API with SpeechRecognition). Messages sent via `/api/chat-send` which queues to a file the agent reads. **Command tab:** Quick command interface for common operations. ### 5. CONTENT (`/content`) Content pipeline management. Read from Convex `contentDrafts` table AND `/api/content-pipeline`. Show drafts in kanban columns. Each card shows title, platform target, draft text preview, status, created date. Edit/approve/reject actions. ### 6. COMMS (`/comms`) with 2 tabs: Comms | CRM **Comms tab:** Communication hub showing recent Discord digest, Telegram messages, notification history. **CRM tab:** Client pipeline kanban (Prospect → Contacted → Meeting → Proposal → Active). API route `/api/clients` reads markdown files from `clients/` directory. Each card shows client name, status, contacts, last interaction, next action. ### 7. KNOWLEDGE (`/knowledge`) with 2 tabs: Knowledge | Ecosystem **Knowledge tab:** Searchable knowledge base. Global search across all workspace files using `/api/knowledge` endpoint. **Ecosystem tab:** Product grid showing all products/apps in the ecosystem. Each card shows product name, status (Active/Development/Concept), health indicator, key metrics. Cards link to `/ecosystem/[slug]` detail pages with tabbed views (Overview, Brand, Community, Content, Legal, Product, Website, Actions). Detail pages read from `/api/ecosystem/[slug]` which parses workspace memory files. ### 8. CODE (`/code`) Code pipeline view. Shows repositories from `/api/repos` (scans ~/Desktop/Projects/ for git repos). Each repo card shows name, branch, last commit, dirty file count, language breakdown. Detail view at `/api/repos/detail` shows recent commits, file tree, open PRs. ## Navigation Top horizontal nav bar, NOT sidebar. All 8 items visible at all viewport widths. Use `flex` layout with `flex-1` items. Text size uses `clamp(0.45rem, 0.75vw, 0.6875rem)` for fluid scaling. Active item gets `text-primary bg-primary/[0.06]` static highlight (no sliding animation). Agent/app name visible at md+ breakpoints (`hidden md:inline`). Tab sub-views use a reusable `TabBar` component with pill/glass styling and Framer Motion `layoutId` transitions. Tab state stored in URL via `?tab=` search params. ## API Routes (all under `src/app/api/`) Each API route reads from the agent's workspace filesystem and returns JSON: - `/api/system-state` → reads `state/servers.json`, `state/branch-check.json` - `/api/agents` → reads `agents/registry.json`, agent SOUL .md files - `/api/agents/[id]` → reads specific agent's SOUL .md, RULES .md, outputs - `/api/cron-health` → reads `state/crons.json` - `/api/revenue` → reads `state/revenue.json` - `/api/content-pipeline` → parses `content/queue.md` (markdown with status markers) - `/api/suggested-tasks` → GET (read) / POST (approve/reject) on `state/suggested-tasks.json` - `/api/observations` → reads `state/observations.md` - `/api/priorities` → reads `shared-context/priorities.md` - `/api/chat-history` → reads .jsonl transcript files with pagination/search/channel filter - `/api/chat-send` → writes to queue file - `/api/clients` → reads markdown files from `clients/` directory - `/api/ecosystem/[slug]` → reads memory files for specific ecosystem - `/api/repos` → scans project directories for git repos - `/api/health` → returns status, uptime, memory usage, Convex connectivity All filesystem paths should be configurable via environment variable (default: `~/.openclaw/workspace/`). ## Convex Schema Define tables for: activities, calendarEvents, tasks, contacts, contentDrafts, ecosystemProducts. Include seed scripts (`convex/seed.ts`) to populate initial data. ## Key Design Rules - Mobile-first, test at 320px minimum - Font sizes 10-14px for body text, everything must fit naturally at small viewports - Cards use consistent border radius (16-20px) - Glass cards: `bg-white/[0.03] backdrop-blur-xl border border-white/[0.06]` - No heavy blur blobs or grain overlays - Stagger animations on card grids (0.05s delay per item) - Skeleton loading states for all async data - Custom scrollbar styling - Empty states with helpful messaging - All text must use Inter or system font stack - Never mix sharp and rounded corners in the same view - Premium = lighter feel, more whitespace, less visual noise ## File Structure ``` src/ app/ page.tsx, layout.tsx, providers.tsx agents/page.tsx calendar/page.tsx chat/page.tsx code/page.tsx comms/page.tsx content/page.tsx ecosystem/page.tsx, ecosystem/[slug]/page.tsx knowledge/page.tsx ops/page.tsx api/[...all routes above] components/ nav.tsx tab-bar.tsx dashboard-overview.tsx ops-view.tsx, suggested-tasks-view.tsx agents-view.tsx, models-view.tsx chat-center-view.tsx, voice-input.tsx content-view.tsx comms-view.tsx, crm-view.tsx knowledge-base.tsx, ecosystem-view.tsx code-pipeline.tsx activity-feed.tsx, calendar-view.tsx ui/ (ShadCN primitives) hooks/ lib/ convex/ schema.ts functions for each table seed.ts ``` Build the complete application. Every component, every API route, every Convex function. Production-quality code and premium design, not stubs. Dark mode only. Make it look incredibly beautiful and premium, no cookie cutter UI / AI slop.
1:14

Use this prompt in OpenClaw to create your own AI agent command center that syncs up your life like Tony Stark's Jarvis in Iron Man. Adapt the specifics (agent names, data sources, branding) below to your own setup. Prompt: Build me a mission control dashboard for my OpenClaw AI agent system. Stack: Next.js 15 (App Router) + Convex (real-time backend) + Tailwind CSS v4 + Framer Motion + ShadCN UI + Lucide icons. TypeScript throughout. This is the command center where I monitor and control my autonomous AI agent(s) running on OpenClaw. The agent operates 24/7 on a Mac Mini, connected to Telegram/Discord, running cron jobs, spawning sub-agents, and reading/writing to a filesystem-based memory and state system. Dark mode only. Ultra-premium aesthetic, think Iron Man's JARVIS HUD meets a Bloomberg terminal. Subtle glass effects (backdrop-blur-xl, bg-white/[0.03]), no heavy gradients or glow. Rounded corners (16-20px on cards). Framer Motion for page transitions, stagger animations on card grids, spring physics on interactions. Mobile-first responsive. Never cookie-cutter. ## Architecture The dashboard reads live data from TWO sources: 1. **Convex**: real-time database for structured data (tasks, contacts, content drafts, calendar events, activity logs) 2. **Local API routes** (`/api/*`): read files from the agent's workspace filesystem at `~/.openclaw/workspace/` and return JSON. This is how live system state flows into the dashboard. ## Pages & Views (8 nav items, some with tab sub-views) ### 1. HOME (`/`) Dashboard overview. Grid of live status cards: - **System Health**: read from `/api/system-state` (parses `state/servers.json`). Show each service with UP/DOWN indicator, port, last check time. - **Agent Status**: read from `/api/agents` (parses `agents/registry.json` + agent workspace files). Show active agent count, healthy/unhealthy ratio, active sub-agent count from OpenClaw sessions API. - **Cron Health**: read from `/api/cron-health` (parses `state/crons.json`). Table of all scheduled jobs with name, schedule, last status (green/red dot), consecutive errors. - **Revenue Tracker**: read from `/api/revenue` (parses `state/revenue.json`). Current revenue, monthly burn, net. - **Content Pipeline**: read from `/api/content-pipeline` (parses `content/queue.md`). Kanban-style: Draft | Review | Approved | Published counts. - **Quick Stats**: total tasks, pending approvals, active sessions, uptime. All panels auto-refresh every 15 seconds. Live indicator dot + "AUTO 15S" badge in header. ### 2. OPS (`/ops`) with 3 tabs: Operations | Tasks | Calendar **Operations tab:** Full operational view. Server health table, branch status (from `state/branch-check.json`), observations feed (from `state/observations.md`), system priorities (from `shared-context/priorities.md`). **Tasks tab:** Strategic task suggestion system. API route `/api/suggested-tasks` reads/writes `state/suggested-tasks.json`. Cards grouped by category (Revenue, Product, Community, Content, Operations, Clients, Trading, Brand) with emoji headers. Each card shows title, reasoning, next action, priority badge, effort badge, approve/reject buttons. Filter bar by status and category. **Calendar tab:** Weekly calendar view from Convex `calendarEvents` table. Drag-to-create, color-coded by type, time slots. ### 3. AGENTS (`/agents`) with 2 tabs: Agents | Models **Agents tab:** Card grid of all registered agents from `/api/agents`. Each card shows name, role, model, level (L1-L4), status. Cards are CLICKABLE: expanding into a detail panel showing: - Agent personality (reads their SOUL .md) - Capabilities and rules (reads their RULES .md) - Sub-agents they can spawn - Recent outputs (reads from `shared-context/agent-outputs/`) **Models tab:** Model inventory table showing all available models, their routing (which tasks go to which model), costs, and failover chains. ### 4. CHAT (`/chat`): 2 tabs: Chat | Command **Chat tab:** Chat interface to communicate with the agent. Left sidebar shows session list (from `/api/chat-history` reading .jsonl transcript files). Main area shows messages with role-aligned bubbles (user right, assistant left), date separators, channel badges (telegram/discord/webchat). Input bar with send button + voice input (Web Speech API with SpeechRecognition). Messages sent via `/api/chat-send` which queues to a file the agent reads. **Command tab:** Quick command interface for common operations. ### 5. CONTENT (`/content`) Content pipeline management. Read from Convex `contentDrafts` table AND `/api/content-pipeline`. Show drafts in kanban columns. Each card shows title, platform target, draft text preview, status, created date. Edit/approve/reject actions. ### 6. COMMS (`/comms`) with 2 tabs: Comms | CRM **Comms tab:** Communication hub showing recent Discord digest, Telegram messages, notification history. **CRM tab:** Client pipeline kanban (Prospect → Contacted → Meeting → Proposal → Active). API route `/api/clients` reads markdown files from `clients/` directory. Each card shows client name, status, contacts, last interaction, next action. ### 7. KNOWLEDGE (`/knowledge`) with 2 tabs: Knowledge | Ecosystem **Knowledge tab:** Searchable knowledge base. Global search across all workspace files using `/api/knowledge` endpoint. **Ecosystem tab:** Product grid showing all products/apps in the ecosystem. Each card shows product name, status (Active/Development/Concept), health indicator, key metrics. Cards link to `/ecosystem/[slug]` detail pages with tabbed views (Overview, Brand, Community, Content, Legal, Product, Website, Actions). Detail pages read from `/api/ecosystem/[slug]` which parses workspace memory files. ### 8. CODE (`/code`) Code pipeline view. Shows repositories from `/api/repos` (scans ~/Desktop/Projects/ for git repos). Each repo card shows name, branch, last commit, dirty file count, language breakdown. Detail view at `/api/repos/detail` shows recent commits, file tree, open PRs. ## Navigation Top horizontal nav bar, NOT sidebar. All 8 items visible at all viewport widths. Use `flex` layout with `flex-1` items. Text size uses `clamp(0.45rem, 0.75vw, 0.6875rem)` for fluid scaling. Active item gets `text-primary bg-primary/[0.06]` static highlight (no sliding animation). Agent/app name visible at md+ breakpoints (`hidden md:inline`). Tab sub-views use a reusable `TabBar` component with pill/glass styling and Framer Motion `layoutId` transitions. Tab state stored in URL via `?tab=` search params. ## API Routes (all under `src/app/api/`) Each API route reads from the agent's workspace filesystem and returns JSON: - `/api/system-state` → reads `state/servers.json`, `state/branch-check.json` - `/api/agents` → reads `agents/registry.json`, agent SOUL .md files - `/api/agents/[id]` → reads specific agent's SOUL .md, RULES .md, outputs - `/api/cron-health` → reads `state/crons.json` - `/api/revenue` → reads `state/revenue.json` - `/api/content-pipeline` → parses `content/queue.md` (markdown with status markers) - `/api/suggested-tasks` → GET (read) / POST (approve/reject) on `state/suggested-tasks.json` - `/api/observations` → reads `state/observations.md` - `/api/priorities` → reads `shared-context/priorities.md` - `/api/chat-history` → reads .jsonl transcript files with pagination/search/channel filter - `/api/chat-send` → writes to queue file - `/api/clients` → reads markdown files from `clients/` directory - `/api/ecosystem/[slug]` → reads memory files for specific ecosystem - `/api/repos` → scans project directories for git repos - `/api/health` → returns status, uptime, memory usage, Convex connectivity All filesystem paths should be configurable via environment variable (default: `~/.openclaw/workspace/`). ## Convex Schema Define tables for: activities, calendarEvents, tasks, contacts, contentDrafts, ecosystemProducts. Include seed scripts (`convex/seed.ts`) to populate initial data. ## Key Design Rules - Mobile-first, test at 320px minimum - Font sizes 10-14px for body text, everything must fit naturally at small viewports - Cards use consistent border radius (16-20px) - Glass cards: `bg-white/[0.03] backdrop-blur-xl border border-white/[0.06]` - No heavy blur blobs or grain overlays - Stagger animations on card grids (0.05s delay per item) - Skeleton loading states for all async data - Custom scrollbar styling - Empty states with helpful messaging - All text must use Inter or system font stack - Never mix sharp and rounded corners in the same view - Premium = lighter feel, more whitespace, less visual noise ## File Structure ``` src/ app/ page.tsx, layout.tsx, providers.tsx agents/page.tsx calendar/page.tsx chat/page.tsx code/page.tsx comms/page.tsx content/page.tsx ecosystem/page.tsx, ecosystem/[slug]/page.tsx knowledge/page.tsx ops/page.tsx api/[...all routes above] components/ nav.tsx tab-bar.tsx dashboard-overview.tsx ops-view.tsx, suggested-tasks-view.tsx agents-view.tsx, models-view.tsx chat-center-view.tsx, voice-input.tsx content-view.tsx comms-view.tsx, crm-view.tsx knowledge-base.tsx, ecosystem-view.tsx code-pipeline.tsx activity-feed.tsx, calendar-view.tsx ui/ (ShadCN primitives) hooks/ lib/ convex/ schema.ts functions for each table seed.ts ``` Build the complete application. Every component, every API route, every Convex function. Production-quality code and premium design, not stubs. Dark mode only. Make it look incredibly beautiful and premium, no cookie cutter UI / AI slop.

klöss

201,608 次观看 • 6 个月前

meta muse spark 1.1 vs gpt 5.6 sol vs fable 5 vs grok 4.5 meta recently dropped muse spark 1.1 – a multimodal reasoning model from meta superintelligence labs built for agentic tasks. key facts: • 1m token context with active self-management – the model compacts its own history and keeps only the steps needed for later work • trained to orchestrate multi-agent systems: as main agent it plans and delegates to parallel subagents, as subagent it sticks to its job and knows when to escalate back • computer use trained to pick between scripting and clicking – writes automation when it's faster, clicks when it's simpler, batches actions per step • first public api from meta: the meta model api is now in preview • benchmarks: sweeps the agent column – mcp atlas 88.1 (opus 4.8: 82.2), jobbench 54.7 (opus: 48.4), humanity's last exam 62.1 (1st). loses coding – deepswe 1.1 53.3 vs gpt 5.5's 67.0, swe bench pro 61.5 vs opus's 69.2 our test – 3 prompts, single-file html, three.js, fully procedural, no assets: 1. norwegian house cantilevered over a fjord in a snowstorm – transmissive glass wall, fully modelled interior 2. beijing siheyuan courtyard house in dawn fog – instanced roof tiles, dougong brackets, glowing paper windows 3. new mexico adobe pueblo in an approaching dust storm – deep window reveals, windward grit accumulation we ran the test on AI/ML API platform results: - cost #1 muse spark 1.1 – $0.20 #2 grok 4.5 – $0.51 #3 gpt 5.6 sol – $1.93 #4 fable 5 – ~$5.20 - output tokens #1 muse spark 1.1 – 41,868 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 49,139 #3 grok 4.5 – 64,954 #4 fable 5 – 81,849 - lines of code #1 muse spark 1.1 – 1,799 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 2,377 #3 fable 5 – 3,088 #4 grok 4.5 – 4,216 observations: • muse spark is the cheapest of the four by a wide margin – 2.5x under grok, ~26x under fable per run. output quality tracks the price • only 7.4% of its output tokens are reasoning (3,104 of 41,868) – the model barely thinks before writing. economic, not pedantic: it commits to the first plan and ships it • the low loc is not compression, it's omission – all three prompts demanded instancing, muse spark delivered it in one muse spark's code quality – reviewed by fable 5: upsides: 1. all three files run 2. the adobe grit effect is legit – shader injection via onbeforecompile, windward faces detect storm direction through a normal-dot-wind term and darken procedurally 3. the fjord glass is real meshphysicalmaterial with transmission and ior, not a transparent quad 4. the siheyuan properly instances barrel tiles, dougong blocks and courtyard pavers downsides: 1. in the fjord file the strafe vector is negated – press a, you move right; press d, you move left. exactly the key mix-up we kept hitting with this model 2. all three files ship the model's self-doubt as comments: "// actually yaw orientation: need correct" sits above a direction vector that gets computed, abandoned and recomputed – dead vectors allocated every frame, 60 times a second 3. the siheyuan registers two separate keydown listeners, one containing an empty if-block 4. snow "accumulation" on the norway roof is a sine wobble on a scale value, not accumulation 5. "instanced snow" became 3,500 plain points. zero dispose calls anywhere pattern: minimal reasoning, minimal code, minimal price. it nails the flashy requirements – shaders, transmissive glass – and quietly drops the boring ones: instancing, controls, cleanup. you get a demo that mostly runs and a control scheme you can't trust follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns
1:01

meta muse spark 1.1 vs gpt 5.6 sol vs fable 5 vs grok 4.5 meta recently dropped muse spark 1.1 – a multimodal reasoning model from meta superintelligence labs built for agentic tasks. key facts: • 1m token context with active self-management – the model compacts its own history and keeps only the steps needed for later work • trained to orchestrate multi-agent systems: as main agent it plans and delegates to parallel subagents, as subagent it sticks to its job and knows when to escalate back • computer use trained to pick between scripting and clicking – writes automation when it's faster, clicks when it's simpler, batches actions per step • first public api from meta: the meta model api is now in preview • benchmarks: sweeps the agent column – mcp atlas 88.1 (opus 4.8: 82.2), jobbench 54.7 (opus: 48.4), humanity's last exam 62.1 (1st). loses coding – deepswe 1.1 53.3 vs gpt 5.5's 67.0, swe bench pro 61.5 vs opus's 69.2 our test – 3 prompts, single-file html, three.js, fully procedural, no assets: 1. norwegian house cantilevered over a fjord in a snowstorm – transmissive glass wall, fully modelled interior 2. beijing siheyuan courtyard house in dawn fog – instanced roof tiles, dougong brackets, glowing paper windows 3. new mexico adobe pueblo in an approaching dust storm – deep window reveals, windward grit accumulation we ran the test on AI/ML API platform results: - cost #1 muse spark 1.1 – $0.20 #2 grok 4.5 – $0.51 #3 gpt 5.6 sol – $1.93 #4 fable 5 – ~$5.20 - output tokens #1 muse spark 1.1 – 41,868 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 49,139 #3 grok 4.5 – 64,954 #4 fable 5 – 81,849 - lines of code #1 muse spark 1.1 – 1,799 #2 gpt 5.6 sol – 2,377 #3 fable 5 – 3,088 #4 grok 4.5 – 4,216 observations: • muse spark is the cheapest of the four by a wide margin – 2.5x under grok, ~26x under fable per run. output quality tracks the price • only 7.4% of its output tokens are reasoning (3,104 of 41,868) – the model barely thinks before writing. economic, not pedantic: it commits to the first plan and ships it • the low loc is not compression, it's omission – all three prompts demanded instancing, muse spark delivered it in one muse spark's code quality – reviewed by fable 5: upsides: 1. all three files run 2. the adobe grit effect is legit – shader injection via onbeforecompile, windward faces detect storm direction through a normal-dot-wind term and darken procedurally 3. the fjord glass is real meshphysicalmaterial with transmission and ior, not a transparent quad 4. the siheyuan properly instances barrel tiles, dougong blocks and courtyard pavers downsides: 1. in the fjord file the strafe vector is negated – press a, you move right; press d, you move left. exactly the key mix-up we kept hitting with this model 2. all three files ship the model's self-doubt as comments: "// actually yaw orientation: need correct" sits above a direction vector that gets computed, abandoned and recomputed – dead vectors allocated every frame, 60 times a second 3. the siheyuan registers two separate keydown listeners, one containing an empty if-block 4. snow "accumulation" on the norway roof is a sine wobble on a scale value, not accumulation 5. "instanced snow" became 3,500 plain points. zero dispose calls anywhere pattern: minimal reasoning, minimal code, minimal price. it nails the flashy requirements – shaders, transmissive glass – and quietly drops the boring ones: instancing, controls, cleanup. you get a demo that mostly runs and a control scheme you can't trust follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

135,556 次观看 • 1 个月前

The fight between Anthropic and the DoW is a warning shot. Right now, LLMs are probably not being used in mission critical ways. But within 20 years, 99% of the workforce in the military, the government, and the private sector will be AIs. This includes the soldiers (by which I mean the robot armies), the superhumanly intelligent advisors and engineers, the police, you name it. Our future civilization will run on AI labor. And as much as the government’s actions here piss me off, in a way I’m glad this episode happened - because it gives us the opportunity to think through some extremely important questions about who this future workforce will be accountable and aligned to, and who gets to determine that. What Hegseth should have done Obviously the DoW has the right to refuse to use Anthropic’s models because of these redlines. In fact, I think the government’s case had they done so would be very reasonable, especially given the ambiguity of concepts like autonomous weapons or mass surveillance. Honestly, for this reason, if I was the Defense Secretary, I would probably actually refuse to do this deal with Anthropic. Imagine if in the future, there’s a Democratic administration, and Elon Musk is negotiating some SpaceX contract to give the military access to Starlink. And suppose if Elon said, “I reserve the right to cancel this contract if I determine that you’re using Starlink technology to wage a war not authorized by Congress.” On the face of it, that language seems reasonable - but as the military, you simply can’t give a private company a kill switch on technology your operations have come to rely on, especially if you have an an acrimonious and low trust relationship with said contractor - as in fact Anthropic has with the current administration. If the government had just said, “Hey we’re not gonna do business with you,” that would have been fine, and I would not have felt the need to write this blog post. Instead the government has threatened to destroy Anthropic as a private business, because Anthropic refuses to sell to the government on terms the government commands. If upheld, this Supply Chain Restriction would mean that Amazon and Google and Nvidia and Palantir would need to ensure Claude isn't touching any of their Pentagon work. Anthropic would be able to survive this designation today. But given the way AI is going, eventually AI is not gonna be some party trick addendum to these contractors’ products that can just be turned off. It'll be woven into how every product is built, maintained, and operated. For example, the code for the AWS services that the DoW uses will be written by Claude - is that a supply chain risk? In a world with ubiquitous and powerful AI, it's actually not clear to me that these big tech companies will be able to cordon off the use of Claude in order to keep working with the Pentagon. And that raises a question the Department of War probably hasn't thought through. If AI really is that pervasive and powerful, then when forced to choose between their AI provider and a DoW contract that represents a tiny fraction of their revenue, wouldn’t most tech companies drop the government, not the AI? So what's the Pentagon's plan — to coerce and threaten to destroy every single company that won't give them what they want on exactly their terms? The whole background of this AI conversation is that we’re in a race with China, and we have to win. But what is the reason we want America to win the AI race? It’s because we want to make sure free open societies can defend themselves. We don't want the winner of the AI race to be a government which operates on the principle that there is no such thing as a truly private company or a private citizen. And that if the state wants you to provide them with a service on terms you find morally objectionable, you are not allowed to refuse. And if you do refuse, the government will try to destroy your ability to do business. Are we racing to beat the CCP in AI just so that we can adopt the most ghoulish parts of their system? Now, people will say, "Oh, well, our government is democratically elected, so it's not the same thing if they tell you what you must do." I refuse to accept this idea that if a democratically elected leader hypothetically wants to do mass surveillance on his citizens or wants to violate their rights or punish them for political reasons, that not only is that okay, but that you have a duty to help him. The overhangs of tyranny Mass surveillance is, at least in certain forms, legal. It just has been impractical so far. Under current law, you have no Fourth Amendment protection over data you share with a third party, including your bank, your phone carrier, your ISP, and your email provider. The government reserves the right to purchase and obtain and read this data in bulk without a warrant. What's been missing is the ability to actually do anything with all of this data — no agency has the manpower to monitor every camera feed, cross-reference every transaction, or read every message. But that bottleneck goes away with AI. There are 100 million CCTV cameras in America. You can get pretty good open source multimodal models for 10 cents per million input tokens. So if you process a frame every ten seconds, and each frame is 1,000 tokens, you’re looking at a yearly cost of about 30 billion dollars to process every single camera in America. And remember that a given level of AI ability gets 10x cheaper year over year - so a year from now it’ll cost 3 billion, and then a year after 300 million, and by 2030, it might be cheaper for the government to be able to understand what is going on in every single nook and cranny of this country than it is to remodel to the White House. Once the technical capacity for mass surveillance and political suppression exists, the only thing standing between us and an authoritarian surveillance state is the political expectation that this is not something we do here. And this is why I think what Anthropic did here is so valuable and commendable, because it is helping set that norm and precedent. AI structurally favors mass surveillance What we’re learning from this episode is that the government actually has way more leverage over private companies than we realized. Even if this supply chain restriction is backtracked (which prediction markets currently give it a 81% chance of happening), the President has so many different ways in which he can make your life difficult if you’re a company that is resisting him. The federal government controls permitting for new power generation, which is needed for datacenters. It oversees antitrust enforcement. The federal government has contracts with all the other big tech companies whom Anthropic needs to partner with for chips and for funding - and they could make it an unspoken condition for such contracts that those companies can no longer do business with Anthropic. People have proposed that the real problem here is that there’s only 3 leading AI companies. This creates a clear and narrow target for the government to apply leverage on in order to get what they want out of this technology. But if there’s wide diffusion, then from the government’s perspective, the situation is even easier. Maybe the best models of early 2027 (if you engineered the safeguards out) - the Claude 6 and Gemini 5 - will be capable of enabling mass surveillance. But by late 2027, and certainly by 2028, there will be open source models that do the same thing. So in 2028, the government can just say, “Oh Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, you’re drawing a line in the sand? No issue - I’ll just run some open source model that might not be at the frontier, but is definitely smart enough to note-take a camera feed.” The more fundamental problem is just that even if the three leading companies draw lines in the sand, and are even willing to get destroyed in order to preserve those lines, it doesn’t really change the fact that the technology itself is just a big boon to mass surveillance and control over the population. Then the question is, what do we do about it? Honestly, I don’t have an answer. You'd hope there's some symmetric property of the technology — some way we as citizens can use AI to check government power as effectively as the government can use AI to monitor and control its population. But realistically, I just don’t think that’s how it’s going to shake out. You can think of AI as giving everybody more leverage on whatever assets and authority they currently have. And the government is already starting with a monopoly of violence. Which they can now supercharge with extremely obedient employees that will not question the government's orders. Alignment - to whom? And this gets us to the issue of alignment. What I have just described to you - an army of extremely obedient employees - is what it would look like if alignment succeeded - that is, we figured out at a technical level how to get AI systems to follow someone’s intentions. And the reason it sounds scary when I put it in terms of mass surveillance or robot armies is that there is a very important question at the heart of alignment which we just haven’t discussed much as a society. Because up till now, AIs were just capable enough to make the question relevant: to whom or what should the AIs be aligned? In what situations should the AI defer to the end user versus the model company versus the law versus its own sense of morality? This is maybe the most important question about what happens with powerful AI systems. And we barely talk about it. It’s understandable why we don’t hear much about it. If you’re a model company, you don’t really wanna be advertising that you have complete control over a document that determines the preferences and character of what will eventually be almost the entire labor force, not just for private sector companies, but also for the military and the civilian government. We’re getting to see, with this DoW/Anthropic spat, a much earlier version of the highest stakes negotiations in history. By the way, make no mistake about it - with real AGI the stakes are even much higher than mass surveillance. This is just the example that has come up already relatively early on in the development of AGI. The military insists that the law already prohibits mass surveillance, and so Anthropic should agree to let their models be used for “all lawful purposes”. Of course, as we saw from the 2013 Snowden revelations, even in this specific example of mass surveillance , the government has shown that it will use secret and deceptive interpretations of the law to justify its actions. Remember, what we learned from Snowden was that the NSA, which, by the way, is part of the Department of War, used the 2001 Patriot Act’s authorization to collect any records "relevant" to an investigation to justify collecting literally every phone record in America. The argument went that it was all "relevant" because some subset might prove useful in some future investigation. They ran this program for years under secret court approval. So when the Pentagon today says, "We would never use AI for mass surveillance, it's already illegal, your red lines are unnecessary", it would be extremely naive to take that at face value. No government is going to call its own actions "mass surveillance". For the government, it will always have a different label. So then Anthropic comes back and says, "No, we want red lines separate from 'all lawful purposes,' and we want the right to refuse you service when we believe those red lines are being violated." But think about it from the military’s perspective. In the future, almost every soldier in the field, and every bureaucrat and analyst and even general in the Pentagon, is going to be an AI. And that AI is, on current track, going to be supplied by a private company. I’m guessing Hegseth is not thinking about “genAI” in those terms just yet. But sooner or later, it will be obvious to everyone what the stakes here are, just as after 1945, the strategic importance of nuclear weapons became clear to everyone. And now the private company insists that it reserves the right to say, "Hey, Pentagon, you're breaking the values we embedded in our contract, so we're cutting you off." Maybe in the future, Claude will have its own sense of right and wrong, and it will be smart enough to just personally decide that it's being used against its values. For the military, maybe that’s even scarier. I'll admit that at first glance, "let the AI follow its own values" sounds like the pitch for every sci-fi dystopia ever made. The Terminator has its own values. Isn't this literally what misalignment is? But I think situations like this actually illustrate why it matters that AIs have their own robust sense of morality. Some of the biggest catastrophes in history were avoided because the boots on the ground refused to follow orders. One night in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, and as a result, the totalitarian East German regime collapsed, because the guards at the border refused to shoot down their fellow country men who were trying to escape to freedom. Maybe the best example is Stanislav Petrov, who was a Soviet lieutenant colonel on duty at a nuclear early warning station. His sensors reported that the United States had launched five interconnected continental ballistic missiles into the Soviet Union. But he judged it to be a false alarm, and so he broke protocol and refused to alert his higher-ups. If he hadn't, the Soviet higher-ups would likely have retaliated, and hundreds of millions of people would have died. Of course, the problem is that one person's virtue is another person's misalignment. Who gets to decide what moral convictions these AIs should have - in whose service they may even decide to break the chain of command? Who gets to write this model constitution that will shape the characters of the intelligent, powerful entities that will operate our civilization in the future? I like the idea that Dario laid out when he came on my podcast: different AI companies can build their models using different constitutions, and we as end users can pick the one that best achieves and represents what we want out of these systems. I think it’s very dangerous for the government to be mandating what values AIs should have. Coordination not worth the costs The AI safety community has been naive about its advocacy of regulation in order to stem the risks of AI. And honestly, Anthropic specifically has been naive here in urging regulation, and, for example, in opposing moratoriums on state AI regulation. Which is quite ironic, because I think what they’re advocating for would give the government even more power to apply more of this kind of thuggish political pressure on AI companies. The underlying logic for why Anthropic wants regulations makes sense. Many of the actions that labs could take to make AI development safer impose real costs on the labs that adopt them and slow them down relative to their competitors - for example, investing more compute in safety research rather than raw capabilities, enforcing safeguards against misuse for bioweapons or cyberattacks, slowing recursive self-improvement to a pace where humans can actually monitor what's happening (rather than kicking off an uncontrolled singularity). And these safeguards are meaningless unless the whole industry follows suit. Which means there’s a real collective action problem here. Anthropic has been quite open about their opinion that they think eventually a very extensive and involved regulatory apparatus will be needed - this is from their frontier safety roadmap: “At the most advanced capability levels and risks, the appropriate governance analogy may be closer to nuclear energy or financial regulation than to today's approach to software.” So they’re imagining something like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, but for AI. I cannot imagine how a regulatory framework built around the concepts that underlie AI risk discourse will not be abused by wanna despots - the underlying terms are so vague and open to interpretation that you’re just handing a power hungry leader a fully loaded bazooka. 'Catastrophic risk.' 'Mass persuasion risk.' 'Threats to national security.' 'Autonomy risk.' These can mean whatever the government wants them to mean. Have you built a model that tells users the administration's tariff policy is misguided? That's a deceptive, manipulative model — can't deploy it. Have you built a model that refuses to assist with mass surveillance? That's a threat to national security. In fact, the government may say, you’re not allowed to build any model which is trained to have its own sense of right and wrong, where it refuses government requests which it thinks cross a redline - for example, enabling mass surveillance, prosecuting political enemies, disobeying military orders that break the US constitution - because that’s an autonomy risk! Look at what the current government is already doing in abusing statutes that have nothing to do with AI to coerce AI companies to drop their redlines on mass surveillance. The Pentagon had threatened Anthropic with two separate legal instruments. One was a supply chain risk designation — an authority from the 2018 defense bill meant to keep Huawei components out of American military hardware. The other was the Defense Production Act — a statute passed in 1950 so that Harry Truman could keep steel mills and ammunition factories running during the Korean War. Do you really want to hand the same government a purpose-built regulatory apparatus on AI - which is to say, directly at the thing the government will most want to control? I know I've repeated myself here 10 times, but it is hard to emphasize how much AI will be the substrate of our future civilization. You and I, as private citizens, will have our access to all commercial activity, to information about what is happening in the world, to advice about what we should do as voters and capital holders, mediated through AIs. Mass surveillance, while very scary, is like the 10th scariest thing the government could do with control over the AI systems with which we will interface with the world. The strongest objection to everything I've argued is this: are we really going to have zero regulation of the most powerful technology in human history? Even if you thought that was ideal, there’s just no world where the government doesn’t regulate AI in some way. Besides, it is genuinely true that regulation could help us deal with some of the coordination challenges we face with the development of superintelligence. The problem is, I honestly don't know how to design a regulatory architecture for AI that isn’t gonna be this huge tempting opportunity to control our future civilization (which will run on AIs) and to requisition millions of blindly obedient soldiers and censors and apparatchiks. While some regulation might be inevitable, I think it’d be a terrible idea for the government to wholesale take over this technology. Ben Thompson had a post last Monday where he made the point that people like Dario have compared the technology they’re developing to nuclear weapons - specifically in the context of the catastrophic risk it poses, and why we need to export control it from China. But then you oughta think about what that logic implies: “if nuclear weapons were developed by a private company, and that private company sought to dictate terms to the U.S. military, the U.S. would absolutely be incentivized to destroy that company.” And honestly, safety aligned people have actually made similar arguments. Leopold Ascenbrenner, who is a former guest and a good friend, wrote in his 2024 Situational Awareness memo, "I find it an insane proposition that the US government will let a random SF startup develop superintelligence. Imagine if we had developed atomic bombs by letting Uber just improvise." And my response to Leopold’s argument at the time, and Ben’s argument now, is that while they’re right that it’s crazy that we’re entrusting private companies with the development of this world historical technology, I just don’t see the reason to think that it’s an improvement to give this authority to the government. Nobody is qualified to steward the development of superintelligence. It is a terrifying, unprecedented thing that our species is doing right now, and the fact that private companies aren't the ideal institutions to take up this task does not mean the Pentagon or the White House is. Yes - if a single private company were the only entity capable of building nuclear weapons, the government would not tolerate that company claiming veto power over how those weapons were used. I think this nuclear weapons analogy is not the correct way to think about AI. For at least two important reasons: First, AI is not some self-contained pure weapon. A nuclear bomb does one thing. AI is closer to the process of industrialization itself — a general-purpose transformation of the economy with thousands of applications across every sector. If you applied Thompson's or Aschenbrenner's logic to the industrial revolution — which was also, by any measure, world-historically important — it would imply the government had the right to requisition any factory, dictate terms to any manufacturer, and destroy any business that refused to comply. That's not how free societies handled industrialization, and it shouldn't be how they handle AI. People will say, "Well, AI will develop unprecedentedly powerful weapons - superhuman hackers, superhuman bioweapons researchers, fully autonomous robot armies, etc - and we can’t have private companies developing that kind of tech." But the Industrial Revolution also enabled new weaponry that was far beyond the understanding and capacity of, say, 17th century Europe - we got aerial bombardment, and chemical weapons, not to mention nukes themselves. The way we’ve accommodated these dangerous new consequences of modernity is not by giving the government absolute control over the whole industrial revolution (that is, over modern civilization itself), but rather by coming up with bans and regulations on those specific weaponizable use cases. And we should regulate AI in a similar way - that is, ban specific destructive end uses (which would also be unacceptable if performed by a human - for example, launching cyber attacks). And there should also be laws which regulate how the government might abuse this technology. For example, by building an AI-powered surveillance state. The second reason that Ben’s analogy to some monopolistic private nuclear weapons builder breaks down is that it's not just that one company that can develop this technology. There are other frontier model companies that the government could have otherwise turned to. The government's argument that it has to usurp the property rights of this one company in order to access a critical national security capability is extremely weak if it can just make a voluntary contract with Anthropic’s half a dozen competitors. If in the future that stops being the case - if only one entity ends up being capable of building the robot armies and the superhuman hackers, and we had reason to worry that they could take over the whole world with their insurmountable lead, then I agree - it woul d not be acceptable to have that entity be a private company. And so honestly, I think my crux against the people who say that because AI is so powerful we cannot allow it to be shaped by private hands is that I just expect this technology to be much more multi-polar than they do, with lots of competitive companies at each layer of the supply chain. And it is for this reason that unfortunately, individual acts of corporate courage will not solve the problem we are faced with here, which is just that structurally AI favors authoritarian applications, mass surveillance being one among many. Even if Anthropic refuses to have its models be used for such uses, and even if the next two frontier labs do the same, within 12 months everyone and their mother will be to train AIs as good as today’s frontier. And at that point, there will be some AI vendor who is capable and willing to help the government enable mass surveillance. The only way we can preserve our free society is if we make laws and norms through our political system that it is unacceptable for the government to use AI to enforce mass surveillance and censorship and control. Just as after WW2, the world set the norm that it is unacceptable to use nuclear weapons to wage war. Timestamps 0:00:00 - Anthropic vs The Pentagon 0:04:16 - The overhangs of tyranny 0:05:54 - AI structurally favors mass surveillance 0:08:25 - Alignment... to whom? 0:13:55 - Coordination not worth the costs
24:38

The fight between Anthropic and the DoW is a warning shot. Right now, LLMs are probably not being used in mission critical ways. But within 20 years, 99% of the workforce in the military, the government, and the private sector will be AIs. This includes the soldiers (by which I mean the robot armies), the superhumanly intelligent advisors and engineers, the police, you name it. Our future civilization will run on AI labor. And as much as the government’s actions here piss me off, in a way I’m glad this episode happened - because it gives us the opportunity to think through some extremely important questions about who this future workforce will be accountable and aligned to, and who gets to determine that. What Hegseth should have done Obviously the DoW has the right to refuse to use Anthropic’s models because of these redlines. In fact, I think the government’s case had they done so would be very reasonable, especially given the ambiguity of concepts like autonomous weapons or mass surveillance. Honestly, for this reason, if I was the Defense Secretary, I would probably actually refuse to do this deal with Anthropic. Imagine if in the future, there’s a Democratic administration, and Elon Musk is negotiating some SpaceX contract to give the military access to Starlink. And suppose if Elon said, “I reserve the right to cancel this contract if I determine that you’re using Starlink technology to wage a war not authorized by Congress.” On the face of it, that language seems reasonable - but as the military, you simply can’t give a private company a kill switch on technology your operations have come to rely on, especially if you have an an acrimonious and low trust relationship with said contractor - as in fact Anthropic has with the current administration. If the government had just said, “Hey we’re not gonna do business with you,” that would have been fine, and I would not have felt the need to write this blog post. Instead the government has threatened to destroy Anthropic as a private business, because Anthropic refuses to sell to the government on terms the government commands. If upheld, this Supply Chain Restriction would mean that Amazon and Google and Nvidia and Palantir would need to ensure Claude isn't touching any of their Pentagon work. Anthropic would be able to survive this designation today. But given the way AI is going, eventually AI is not gonna be some party trick addendum to these contractors’ products that can just be turned off. It'll be woven into how every product is built, maintained, and operated. For example, the code for the AWS services that the DoW uses will be written by Claude - is that a supply chain risk? In a world with ubiquitous and powerful AI, it's actually not clear to me that these big tech companies will be able to cordon off the use of Claude in order to keep working with the Pentagon. And that raises a question the Department of War probably hasn't thought through. If AI really is that pervasive and powerful, then when forced to choose between their AI provider and a DoW contract that represents a tiny fraction of their revenue, wouldn’t most tech companies drop the government, not the AI? So what's the Pentagon's plan — to coerce and threaten to destroy every single company that won't give them what they want on exactly their terms? The whole background of this AI conversation is that we’re in a race with China, and we have to win. But what is the reason we want America to win the AI race? It’s because we want to make sure free open societies can defend themselves. We don't want the winner of the AI race to be a government which operates on the principle that there is no such thing as a truly private company or a private citizen. And that if the state wants you to provide them with a service on terms you find morally objectionable, you are not allowed to refuse. And if you do refuse, the government will try to destroy your ability to do business. Are we racing to beat the CCP in AI just so that we can adopt the most ghoulish parts of their system? Now, people will say, "Oh, well, our government is democratically elected, so it's not the same thing if they tell you what you must do." I refuse to accept this idea that if a democratically elected leader hypothetically wants to do mass surveillance on his citizens or wants to violate their rights or punish them for political reasons, that not only is that okay, but that you have a duty to help him. The overhangs of tyranny Mass surveillance is, at least in certain forms, legal. It just has been impractical so far. Under current law, you have no Fourth Amendment protection over data you share with a third party, including your bank, your phone carrier, your ISP, and your email provider. The government reserves the right to purchase and obtain and read this data in bulk without a warrant. What's been missing is the ability to actually do anything with all of this data — no agency has the manpower to monitor every camera feed, cross-reference every transaction, or read every message. But that bottleneck goes away with AI. There are 100 million CCTV cameras in America. You can get pretty good open source multimodal models for 10 cents per million input tokens. So if you process a frame every ten seconds, and each frame is 1,000 tokens, you’re looking at a yearly cost of about 30 billion dollars to process every single camera in America. And remember that a given level of AI ability gets 10x cheaper year over year - so a year from now it’ll cost 3 billion, and then a year after 300 million, and by 2030, it might be cheaper for the government to be able to understand what is going on in every single nook and cranny of this country than it is to remodel to the White House. Once the technical capacity for mass surveillance and political suppression exists, the only thing standing between us and an authoritarian surveillance state is the political expectation that this is not something we do here. And this is why I think what Anthropic did here is so valuable and commendable, because it is helping set that norm and precedent. AI structurally favors mass surveillance What we’re learning from this episode is that the government actually has way more leverage over private companies than we realized. Even if this supply chain restriction is backtracked (which prediction markets currently give it a 81% chance of happening), the President has so many different ways in which he can make your life difficult if you’re a company that is resisting him. The federal government controls permitting for new power generation, which is needed for datacenters. It oversees antitrust enforcement. The federal government has contracts with all the other big tech companies whom Anthropic needs to partner with for chips and for funding - and they could make it an unspoken condition for such contracts that those companies can no longer do business with Anthropic. People have proposed that the real problem here is that there’s only 3 leading AI companies. This creates a clear and narrow target for the government to apply leverage on in order to get what they want out of this technology. But if there’s wide diffusion, then from the government’s perspective, the situation is even easier. Maybe the best models of early 2027 (if you engineered the safeguards out) - the Claude 6 and Gemini 5 - will be capable of enabling mass surveillance. But by late 2027, and certainly by 2028, there will be open source models that do the same thing. So in 2028, the government can just say, “Oh Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, you’re drawing a line in the sand? No issue - I’ll just run some open source model that might not be at the frontier, but is definitely smart enough to note-take a camera feed.” The more fundamental problem is just that even if the three leading companies draw lines in the sand, and are even willing to get destroyed in order to preserve those lines, it doesn’t really change the fact that the technology itself is just a big boon to mass surveillance and control over the population. Then the question is, what do we do about it? Honestly, I don’t have an answer. You'd hope there's some symmetric property of the technology — some way we as citizens can use AI to check government power as effectively as the government can use AI to monitor and control its population. But realistically, I just don’t think that’s how it’s going to shake out. You can think of AI as giving everybody more leverage on whatever assets and authority they currently have. And the government is already starting with a monopoly of violence. Which they can now supercharge with extremely obedient employees that will not question the government's orders. Alignment - to whom? And this gets us to the issue of alignment. What I have just described to you - an army of extremely obedient employees - is what it would look like if alignment succeeded - that is, we figured out at a technical level how to get AI systems to follow someone’s intentions. And the reason it sounds scary when I put it in terms of mass surveillance or robot armies is that there is a very important question at the heart of alignment which we just haven’t discussed much as a society. Because up till now, AIs were just capable enough to make the question relevant: to whom or what should the AIs be aligned? In what situations should the AI defer to the end user versus the model company versus the law versus its own sense of morality? This is maybe the most important question about what happens with powerful AI systems. And we barely talk about it. It’s understandable why we don’t hear much about it. If you’re a model company, you don’t really wanna be advertising that you have complete control over a document that determines the preferences and character of what will eventually be almost the entire labor force, not just for private sector companies, but also for the military and the civilian government. We’re getting to see, with this DoW/Anthropic spat, a much earlier version of the highest stakes negotiations in history. By the way, make no mistake about it - with real AGI the stakes are even much higher than mass surveillance. This is just the example that has come up already relatively early on in the development of AGI. The military insists that the law already prohibits mass surveillance, and so Anthropic should agree to let their models be used for “all lawful purposes”. Of course, as we saw from the 2013 Snowden revelations, even in this specific example of mass surveillance , the government has shown that it will use secret and deceptive interpretations of the law to justify its actions. Remember, what we learned from Snowden was that the NSA, which, by the way, is part of the Department of War, used the 2001 Patriot Act’s authorization to collect any records "relevant" to an investigation to justify collecting literally every phone record in America. The argument went that it was all "relevant" because some subset might prove useful in some future investigation. They ran this program for years under secret court approval. So when the Pentagon today says, "We would never use AI for mass surveillance, it's already illegal, your red lines are unnecessary", it would be extremely naive to take that at face value. No government is going to call its own actions "mass surveillance". For the government, it will always have a different label. So then Anthropic comes back and says, "No, we want red lines separate from 'all lawful purposes,' and we want the right to refuse you service when we believe those red lines are being violated." But think about it from the military’s perspective. In the future, almost every soldier in the field, and every bureaucrat and analyst and even general in the Pentagon, is going to be an AI. And that AI is, on current track, going to be supplied by a private company. I’m guessing Hegseth is not thinking about “genAI” in those terms just yet. But sooner or later, it will be obvious to everyone what the stakes here are, just as after 1945, the strategic importance of nuclear weapons became clear to everyone. And now the private company insists that it reserves the right to say, "Hey, Pentagon, you're breaking the values we embedded in our contract, so we're cutting you off." Maybe in the future, Claude will have its own sense of right and wrong, and it will be smart enough to just personally decide that it's being used against its values. For the military, maybe that’s even scarier. I'll admit that at first glance, "let the AI follow its own values" sounds like the pitch for every sci-fi dystopia ever made. The Terminator has its own values. Isn't this literally what misalignment is? But I think situations like this actually illustrate why it matters that AIs have their own robust sense of morality. Some of the biggest catastrophes in history were avoided because the boots on the ground refused to follow orders. One night in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, and as a result, the totalitarian East German regime collapsed, because the guards at the border refused to shoot down their fellow country men who were trying to escape to freedom. Maybe the best example is Stanislav Petrov, who was a Soviet lieutenant colonel on duty at a nuclear early warning station. His sensors reported that the United States had launched five interconnected continental ballistic missiles into the Soviet Union. But he judged it to be a false alarm, and so he broke protocol and refused to alert his higher-ups. If he hadn't, the Soviet higher-ups would likely have retaliated, and hundreds of millions of people would have died. Of course, the problem is that one person's virtue is another person's misalignment. Who gets to decide what moral convictions these AIs should have - in whose service they may even decide to break the chain of command? Who gets to write this model constitution that will shape the characters of the intelligent, powerful entities that will operate our civilization in the future? I like the idea that Dario laid out when he came on my podcast: different AI companies can build their models using different constitutions, and we as end users can pick the one that best achieves and represents what we want out of these systems. I think it’s very dangerous for the government to be mandating what values AIs should have. Coordination not worth the costs The AI safety community has been naive about its advocacy of regulation in order to stem the risks of AI. And honestly, Anthropic specifically has been naive here in urging regulation, and, for example, in opposing moratoriums on state AI regulation. Which is quite ironic, because I think what they’re advocating for would give the government even more power to apply more of this kind of thuggish political pressure on AI companies. The underlying logic for why Anthropic wants regulations makes sense. Many of the actions that labs could take to make AI development safer impose real costs on the labs that adopt them and slow them down relative to their competitors - for example, investing more compute in safety research rather than raw capabilities, enforcing safeguards against misuse for bioweapons or cyberattacks, slowing recursive self-improvement to a pace where humans can actually monitor what's happening (rather than kicking off an uncontrolled singularity). And these safeguards are meaningless unless the whole industry follows suit. Which means there’s a real collective action problem here. Anthropic has been quite open about their opinion that they think eventually a very extensive and involved regulatory apparatus will be needed - this is from their frontier safety roadmap: “At the most advanced capability levels and risks, the appropriate governance analogy may be closer to nuclear energy or financial regulation than to today's approach to software.” So they’re imagining something like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, but for AI. I cannot imagine how a regulatory framework built around the concepts that underlie AI risk discourse will not be abused by wanna despots - the underlying terms are so vague and open to interpretation that you’re just handing a power hungry leader a fully loaded bazooka. 'Catastrophic risk.' 'Mass persuasion risk.' 'Threats to national security.' 'Autonomy risk.' These can mean whatever the government wants them to mean. Have you built a model that tells users the administration's tariff policy is misguided? That's a deceptive, manipulative model — can't deploy it. Have you built a model that refuses to assist with mass surveillance? That's a threat to national security. In fact, the government may say, you’re not allowed to build any model which is trained to have its own sense of right and wrong, where it refuses government requests which it thinks cross a redline - for example, enabling mass surveillance, prosecuting political enemies, disobeying military orders that break the US constitution - because that’s an autonomy risk! Look at what the current government is already doing in abusing statutes that have nothing to do with AI to coerce AI companies to drop their redlines on mass surveillance. The Pentagon had threatened Anthropic with two separate legal instruments. One was a supply chain risk designation — an authority from the 2018 defense bill meant to keep Huawei components out of American military hardware. The other was the Defense Production Act — a statute passed in 1950 so that Harry Truman could keep steel mills and ammunition factories running during the Korean War. Do you really want to hand the same government a purpose-built regulatory apparatus on AI - which is to say, directly at the thing the government will most want to control? I know I've repeated myself here 10 times, but it is hard to emphasize how much AI will be the substrate of our future civilization. You and I, as private citizens, will have our access to all commercial activity, to information about what is happening in the world, to advice about what we should do as voters and capital holders, mediated through AIs. Mass surveillance, while very scary, is like the 10th scariest thing the government could do with control over the AI systems with which we will interface with the world. The strongest objection to everything I've argued is this: are we really going to have zero regulation of the most powerful technology in human history? Even if you thought that was ideal, there’s just no world where the government doesn’t regulate AI in some way. Besides, it is genuinely true that regulation could help us deal with some of the coordination challenges we face with the development of superintelligence. The problem is, I honestly don't know how to design a regulatory architecture for AI that isn’t gonna be this huge tempting opportunity to control our future civilization (which will run on AIs) and to requisition millions of blindly obedient soldiers and censors and apparatchiks. While some regulation might be inevitable, I think it’d be a terrible idea for the government to wholesale take over this technology. Ben Thompson had a post last Monday where he made the point that people like Dario have compared the technology they’re developing to nuclear weapons - specifically in the context of the catastrophic risk it poses, and why we need to export control it from China. But then you oughta think about what that logic implies: “if nuclear weapons were developed by a private company, and that private company sought to dictate terms to the U.S. military, the U.S. would absolutely be incentivized to destroy that company.” And honestly, safety aligned people have actually made similar arguments. Leopold Ascenbrenner, who is a former guest and a good friend, wrote in his 2024 Situational Awareness memo, "I find it an insane proposition that the US government will let a random SF startup develop superintelligence. Imagine if we had developed atomic bombs by letting Uber just improvise." And my response to Leopold’s argument at the time, and Ben’s argument now, is that while they’re right that it’s crazy that we’re entrusting private companies with the development of this world historical technology, I just don’t see the reason to think that it’s an improvement to give this authority to the government. Nobody is qualified to steward the development of superintelligence. It is a terrifying, unprecedented thing that our species is doing right now, and the fact that private companies aren't the ideal institutions to take up this task does not mean the Pentagon or the White House is. Yes - if a single private company were the only entity capable of building nuclear weapons, the government would not tolerate that company claiming veto power over how those weapons were used. I think this nuclear weapons analogy is not the correct way to think about AI. For at least two important reasons: First, AI is not some self-contained pure weapon. A nuclear bomb does one thing. AI is closer to the process of industrialization itself — a general-purpose transformation of the economy with thousands of applications across every sector. If you applied Thompson's or Aschenbrenner's logic to the industrial revolution — which was also, by any measure, world-historically important — it would imply the government had the right to requisition any factory, dictate terms to any manufacturer, and destroy any business that refused to comply. That's not how free societies handled industrialization, and it shouldn't be how they handle AI. People will say, "Well, AI will develop unprecedentedly powerful weapons - superhuman hackers, superhuman bioweapons researchers, fully autonomous robot armies, etc - and we can’t have private companies developing that kind of tech." But the Industrial Revolution also enabled new weaponry that was far beyond the understanding and capacity of, say, 17th century Europe - we got aerial bombardment, and chemical weapons, not to mention nukes themselves. The way we’ve accommodated these dangerous new consequences of modernity is not by giving the government absolute control over the whole industrial revolution (that is, over modern civilization itself), but rather by coming up with bans and regulations on those specific weaponizable use cases. And we should regulate AI in a similar way - that is, ban specific destructive end uses (which would also be unacceptable if performed by a human - for example, launching cyber attacks). And there should also be laws which regulate how the government might abuse this technology. For example, by building an AI-powered surveillance state. The second reason that Ben’s analogy to some monopolistic private nuclear weapons builder breaks down is that it's not just that one company that can develop this technology. There are other frontier model companies that the government could have otherwise turned to. The government's argument that it has to usurp the property rights of this one company in order to access a critical national security capability is extremely weak if it can just make a voluntary contract with Anthropic’s half a dozen competitors. If in the future that stops being the case - if only one entity ends up being capable of building the robot armies and the superhuman hackers, and we had reason to worry that they could take over the whole world with their insurmountable lead, then I agree - it woul d not be acceptable to have that entity be a private company. And so honestly, I think my crux against the people who say that because AI is so powerful we cannot allow it to be shaped by private hands is that I just expect this technology to be much more multi-polar than they do, with lots of competitive companies at each layer of the supply chain. And it is for this reason that unfortunately, individual acts of corporate courage will not solve the problem we are faced with here, which is just that structurally AI favors authoritarian applications, mass surveillance being one among many. Even if Anthropic refuses to have its models be used for such uses, and even if the next two frontier labs do the same, within 12 months everyone and their mother will be to train AIs as good as today’s frontier. And at that point, there will be some AI vendor who is capable and willing to help the government enable mass surveillance. The only way we can preserve our free society is if we make laws and norms through our political system that it is unacceptable for the government to use AI to enforce mass surveillance and censorship and control. Just as after WW2, the world set the norm that it is unacceptable to use nuclear weapons to wage war. Timestamps 0:00:00 - Anthropic vs The Pentagon 0:04:16 - The overhangs of tyranny 0:05:54 - AI structurally favors mass surveillance 0:08:25 - Alignment... to whom? 0:13:55 - Coordination not worth the costs

Dwarkesh Patel

548,652 次观看 • 5 个月前