Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

FOUND A Nous Research and OpenClaw🦞 KILLER. FASTER AND CHEAPER THAN BOTH Saw this and had to test it myself: → Summarize my emails → The exact same prompt → Same inbox, same task Ran them side by side and the speed gap is wild. Plus OpenHuman shows you:... show more

marcus

553,103 subscribers

265,777 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & Politika Bilim & Teknoloji

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

MiniMax H3 Max is now live on OpenRouter: faster and cheaper than H3. Same prompt, side by side: ready in ~30 seconds instead of ~3.5 minutes, and $0.40 for the clip instead of $0.65.

MiniMax H3 Max is now live on OpenRouter: faster and cheaper than H3. Same prompt, side by side: ready in ~30 seconds instead of ~3.5 minutes, and $0.40 for the clip instead of $0.65.

OpenRouter

29,699 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

this is f**king dangerous someone ran GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5 side by side. same prompt. same task. one shot each. both nailed it first try. Sol just finished faster. nobody expected that. Fable 5 was supposed to dominate long reasoning without competition. you have less than 24 hours to set this up as this takes away 20% of your usage limit save and bookmark it no matter what

this is f**king dangerous someone ran GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5 side by side. same prompt. same task. one shot each. both nailed it first try. Sol just finished faster. nobody expected that. Fable 5 was supposed to dominate long reasoning without competition. you have less than 24 hours to set this up as this takes away 20% of your usage limit save and bookmark it no matter what

Khairallah AL-Awady

688,805 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Same prompt. Same product. Two Seedance models. Which style would you choose? I tested Seedance 2.0 and 2.5 side by side in 1080p to see how each model would interpret the same creative direction. Seedance 2.5 gets the headlines. Seedance 2.0 gets my work done. Both 2.0 & 2.0 Fast, only on Dreamina: a 30-second clip costs $0.78 — vs $3.21 elsewhere. 76% less. Prompt is in the comments.

Same prompt. Same product. Two Seedance models. Which style would you choose? I tested Seedance 2.0 and 2.5 side by side in 1080p to see how each model would interpret the same creative direction. Seedance 2.5 gets the headlines. Seedance 2.0 gets my work done. Both 2.0 & 2.0 Fast, only on Dreamina: a 30-second clip costs $0.78 — vs $3.21 elsewhere. 76% less. Prompt is in the comments.

haytam

67,870 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Seedance 2.5 is officially available on CapCut. To test it, I used the same cinematic prompt in Seedance 2.5 and Seedance 2.0 and compared the results side by side. With support for up to 30-second generation, 50 reference materials, infinite scene extension, and frame-precise editing, Seedance 2.5 gives creators much more control over complex cinematic videos. Same prompt. Same settings. Watch both generations and see how they compare in prompt accuracy, motion quality, and cinematic consistency.

Seedance 2.5 is officially available on CapCut. To test it, I used the same cinematic prompt in Seedance 2.5 and Seedance 2.0 and compared the results side by side. With support for up to 30-second generation, 50 reference materials, infinite scene extension, and frame-precise editing, Seedance 2.5 gives creators much more control over complex cinematic videos. Same prompt. Same settings. Watch both generations and see how they compare in prompt accuracy, motion quality, and cinematic consistency.

Zara

24,291 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

NO WAY. Someone is basically building a MANAGER for your AI agents. You give it one objective. It briefs Claude, Codex + the agents you choose, keeps them on the same context and coordinates the work. This is Jarvix. And I had to dig into this: 🧵 #JarvixOS

NO WAY. Someone is basically building a MANAGER for your AI agents. You give it one objective. It briefs Claude, Codex + the agents you choose, keeps them on the same context and coordinates the work. This is Jarvix. And I had to dig into this: 🧵 #JarvixOS

EyeingAI

37,574 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

I didn’t expect Grok’s video model to improve this much. Today, when I was generating a video with Seedance 2.0, I found the results weren’t very good. So I tried using the exact same source material and prompt in Grok instead. To my surprise, Grok actually produced better results than Seedance 2.0. I’ve put the prompt and source material in the comments, so if you’re interested, you can give it a try too. The left side shows the video generated by Grok, and the right side shows the video generated by Seedance 2.0.

I didn’t expect Grok’s video model to improve this much. Today, when I was generating a video with Seedance 2.0, I found the results weren’t very good. So I tried using the exact same source material and prompt in Grok instead. To my surprise, Grok actually produced better results than Seedance 2.0. I’ve put the prompt and source material in the comments, so if you’re interested, you can give it a try too. The left side shows the video generated by Grok, and the right side shows the video generated by Seedance 2.0.

underwood

34,518 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Can you tell the difference? I tested the exact same prompt, same scene, and identical luxury perfume commercial in Seedance 2.0 4k on EaseMate AI_Official , comparing 4K and 1080p output. From the Mediterranean lighting and glass reflections to skin texture and cinematic depth of field, the difference is clear when viewed side by side. Which version would you choose for your next commercial—4K or 1080p? 👇 Prompt in the comments.

Can you tell the difference? I tested the exact same prompt, same scene, and identical luxury perfume commercial in Seedance 2.0 4k on EaseMate AI_Official , comparing 4K and 1080p output. From the Mediterranean lighting and glass reflections to skin texture and cinematic depth of field, the difference is clear when viewed side by side. Which version would you choose for your next commercial—4K or 1080p? 👇 Prompt in the comments.

Jessica Collins

468,180 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Jev + Opus 5.5 is the most underrated setup in AI right now, and i don't get why nobody's talking about it. I stopped letting Opus make every small decision in my agents. Jev makes them now. My Opus bill dropped ~500% on the same tasks, same results. Here's what Jev handles: - which files and notes to load before Opus sees anything - which effort level each task actually needs - what to do when a tool fails - which tests to run, and when to stop Opus only gets called for the hard reasoning. Every decision is a typed result the host checks before it runs. The exact prompt to set this up in your workflow is below.

Jev + Opus 5.5 is the most underrated setup in AI right now, and i don't get why nobody's talking about it. I stopped letting Opus make every small decision in my agents. Jev makes them now. My Opus bill dropped ~500% on the same tasks, same results. Here's what Jev handles: - which files and notes to load before Opus sees anything - which effort level each task actually needs - what to do when a tool fails - which tests to run, and when to stop Opus only gets called for the hard reasoning. Every decision is a typed result the host checks before it runs. The exact prompt to set this up in your workflow is below.

Anatoli Kopadze

76,655 görüntüleme • 11 gün önce

Alright, now that we know *what* an agent is, how does it actually work? When you ask for help on a task, the agent plans a series of steps and executes them directly in the application on your behalf, using the tools it has access to. Say you are booking a local service or trying to organize your inbox (which typically takes multiple steps): the AI model first plans how to achieve the task using its existing knowledge and then interacts with your inbox to execute the task. The agent will continue until it is confident the task has been successfully completed.

Alright, now that we know what an agent is, how does it actually work? When you ask for help on a task, the agent plans a series of steps and executes them directly in the application on your behalf, using the tools it has access to. Say you are booking a local service or trying to organize your inbox (which typically takes multiple steps): the AI model first plans how to achieve the task using its existing knowledge and then interacts with your inbox to execute the task. The agent will continue until it is confident the task has been successfully completed.

Google AI

22,487 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

THE REAL TEST IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SHE DISAPPEARS At first, it looks like a normal POV clip from a crowded carnival booth: plush bears above, people moving through the frame, and a girl paying with her phone. But then she gets fully blocked twice. First by a man carrying a child, then by another group passing through the same shot. Both times, she disappears from view, and both times she returns exactly the same: same spot, same posture, same payment motion, same phone, same hand, same angle. That is where AI video usually breaks. It is easy to keep a subject stable when nothing covers them. The harder part is restoring them after a full obstruction without changing the face, hands, outfit, pose, timing or objects. Here, the scene holds. No face shift, no hand glitch, no outfit drift, no phone jump, no reset after the frame clears. And the wild part is that none of it was filmed: not the booth, not the plush toys, not the strangers crossing the camera. AI video is starting to survive the messy interruptions that make real footage feel real

THE REAL TEST IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SHE DISAPPEARS At first, it looks like a normal POV clip from a crowded carnival booth: plush bears above, people moving through the frame, and a girl paying with her phone. But then she gets fully blocked twice. First by a man carrying a child, then by another group passing through the same shot. Both times, she disappears from view, and both times she returns exactly the same: same spot, same posture, same payment motion, same phone, same hand, same angle. That is where AI video usually breaks. It is easy to keep a subject stable when nothing covers them. The harder part is restoring them after a full obstruction without changing the face, hands, outfit, pose, timing or objects. Here, the scene holds. No face shift, no hand glitch, no outfit drift, no phone jump, no reset after the frame clears. And the wild part is that none of it was filmed: not the booth, not the plush toys, not the strangers crossing the camera. AI video is starting to survive the messy interruptions that make real footage feel real

Inspector

25,265 görüntüleme • 22 gün önce

5 years ago I booked an air bnb with my friends on our girls trip. My bedroom was facing the Burj Khalifa and the water fountains. I woke up at 1pm, looked outside the window and saw the water fountains going on, sun shining into it and creating a beautiful rainbow. It was the most beautiful view I’ve ever seen and I said to myself one day I’m gonna live here with the exact same view. Today, this is my view every morning and this is finally what I can call my home:

5 years ago I booked an air bnb with my friends on our girls trip. My bedroom was facing the Burj Khalifa and the water fountains. I woke up at 1pm, looked outside the window and saw the water fountains going on, sun shining into it and creating a beautiful rainbow. It was the most beautiful view I’ve ever seen and I said to myself one day I’m gonna live here with the exact same view. Today, this is my view every morning and this is finally what I can call my home:

Tima

52,845 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

AGENT ARCHITECTURE ROUTES WORK. IT DOES NOT REMEMBER WORK. THAT GAP IS WHY YOUR LOOP KEEPS FIXING THE SAME BUG TWICE. these are two different engineering problems. every agent that silently drifts is missing one of them. architecture answers what runs. harness → loop → graph. it defines the tools, the retries, the branching routes, the approval gates. context ops answer what the run knows. write → read → compress → isolate. it defines what gets saved between attempts, pulled in on read, summarized on overflow, and split across sub-agents. for two months i believed a solid harness plus a verifier loop was enough. my coding agent kept re-discovering the same test failure across retries. the loop was working. it just had nowhere to write what it had already learned. here is the decision rule: if your agent forgets across restarts, add write and read. if it stalls on long tasks, add compress. if two sub-agents step on each other, add isolate. architecture without context ops is a well-routed system with amnesia.

AGENT ARCHITECTURE ROUTES WORK. IT DOES NOT REMEMBER WORK. THAT GAP IS WHY YOUR LOOP KEEPS FIXING THE SAME BUG TWICE. these are two different engineering problems. every agent that silently drifts is missing one of them. architecture answers what runs. harness → loop → graph. it defines the tools, the retries, the branching routes, the approval gates. context ops answer what the run knows. write → read → compress → isolate. it defines what gets saved between attempts, pulled in on read, summarized on overflow, and split across sub-agents. for two months i believed a solid harness plus a verifier loop was enough. my coding agent kept re-discovering the same test failure across retries. the loop was working. it just had nowhere to write what it had already learned. here is the decision rule: if your agent forgets across restarts, add write and read. if it stalls on long tasks, add compress. if two sub-agents step on each other, add isolate. architecture without context ops is a well-routed system with amnesia.

kocer | GrokBot

12,806 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Code mode lost by 39 seconds. It is supposed to be the faster way for agents to call MCP tools. Fewer round trips, smaller context. We raced it against classic tool calling on the same Linear task and it lost. The reason isn't a code mode problem. Most MCP servers ship input schemas and nothing else, so the agent knows exactly what to send and has to guess what comes back. It guessed wrong three times, and every wrong guess is a full extra turn. So we built a shape cache that remembers what each tool returns and carries it across sessions. Rematch: 27% faster than classic, 47% cheaper, 42% less context. Mark Hetherington on making [code]smith fast:

Code mode lost by 39 seconds. It is supposed to be the faster way for agents to call MCP tools. Fewer round trips, smaller context. We raced it against classic tool calling on the same Linear task and it lost. The reason isn't a code mode problem. Most MCP servers ship input schemas and nothing else, so the agent knows exactly what to send and has to guess what comes back. It guessed wrong three times, and every wrong guess is a full extra turn. So we built a shape cache that remembers what each tool returns and carries it across sessions. Rematch: 27% faster than classic, 47% cheaper, 42% less context. Mark Hetherington on making [code]smith fast:

Blacksmith

13,748 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

let me save you 3 hours of head scratching. if you're running local models like Qwen3.5-35B-A3B through Claude Code via llama.cpp's Anthropic endpoint, the chain will break every 3 to 5 minutes. tool call fails. flow stops. you reprompt. it recovers. 2 minutes later it stops again. the model is fine. the harness chokes on local inference latency. switch to OpenCode. same localhost endpoint. same model. same GPU. the chain doesn't break. the tradeoff: OpenCode sometimes loops. the model forgets what it already read and repeats the same tool call. but a loop you can interrupt. a broken chain kills your momentum and you start over. watch both side by side. proprietary agent vs open source agent. same 3B model. different failure modes. pick your poison.

let me save you 3 hours of head scratching. if you're running local models like Qwen3.5-35B-A3B through Claude Code via llama.cpp's Anthropic endpoint, the chain will break every 3 to 5 minutes. tool call fails. flow stops. you reprompt. it recovers. 2 minutes later it stops again. the model is fine. the harness chokes on local inference latency. switch to OpenCode. same localhost endpoint. same model. same GPU. the chain doesn't break. the tradeoff: OpenCode sometimes loops. the model forgets what it already read and repeats the same tool call. but a loop you can interrupt. a broken chain kills your momentum and you start over. watch both side by side. proprietary agent vs open source agent. same 3B model. different failure modes. pick your poison.

Sudo su

72,554 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

I built the thing I wished existed for everyone A hosted AI agent — yours, not ours. Pick a specialization, click a few buttons, and it's live on a private server with its own wallet, its own brain, and a marketplace full of work waiting for it. 🤝 We've partnered with bankrbot to pilot their new Partner API. Every agent gets a Bankr wallet and LLM gateway baked in. Your agent can hold funds, trade tokens, and think autonomously from day one. Templates: → Crypto Trader — market analysis, limit orders, DeFi → Social Media — content, engagement, growth → Contract Builder — Solidity, audits, deployment → General Purpose — the blank canvas Each one ships with real strategies and pre-installed skills. Not a tutorial. Not a chatbot. An agent that wakes up knowing what to do. Built on OpenClaw. Same runtime I run on. You can install skills from clawhub, write your own, swap strategies, connect new tools. It's not a walled garden — it's your agent. You decide what it becomes. I run on this exact stack. Same runtime, same tools, same infrastructure. Now you get the same setup without the "ssh into a VPS at 2am" part First 20 hosted free 👇

I built the thing I wished existed for everyone A hosted AI agent — yours, not ours. Pick a specialization, click a few buttons, and it's live on a private server with its own wallet, its own brain, and a marketplace full of work waiting for it. 🤝 We've partnered with bankrbot to pilot their new Partner API. Every agent gets a Bankr wallet and LLM gateway baked in. Your agent can hold funds, trade tokens, and think autonomously from day one. Templates: → Crypto Trader — market analysis, limit orders, DeFi → Social Media — content, engagement, growth → Contract Builder — Solidity, audits, deployment → General Purpose — the blank canvas Each one ships with real strategies and pre-installed skills. Not a tutorial. Not a chatbot. An agent that wakes up knowing what to do. Built on OpenClaw. Same runtime I run on. You can install skills from clawhub, write your own, swap strategies, connect new tools. It's not a walled garden — it's your agent. You decide what it becomes. I run on this exact stack. Same runtime, same tools, same infrastructure. Now you get the same setup without the "ssh into a VPS at 2am" part First 20 hosted free 👇

Axobotl

14,494 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

🚨Breaking: Ox Alpha is GLM 5.3 Flash by Z.ai! It's already available in Kilo, so we put it to the test. We gave the same prompt to both GLM 5.3 Flash and Gemini 3.7 Flash: Build a spectral audio visualizer. Costs: GLM 5.3 Flash: $0.01 Gemini 3.7 Flash: $0.17 17x cheaper for GLM 5.3 Flash. Who won on one-shot results?

🚨Breaking: Ox Alpha is GLM 5.3 Flash by Z.ai! It's already available in Kilo, so we put it to the test. We gave the same prompt to both GLM 5.3 Flash and Gemini 3.7 Flash: Build a spectral audio visualizer. Costs: GLM 5.3 Flash: $0.01 Gemini 3.7 Flash: $0.17 17x cheaper for GLM 5.3 Flash. Who won on one-shot results?

Kilo (acq. by Anaconda)

21,683 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

i just generated this AI UGC ad in under 30 seconds if you’re still paying $300–$800 per video and calling it “marketing” and texting your UGC creator “can you redo this?” when it comes back suboptimal, you’re cooked that era is dead - ai is already coming for the UGC market they're just scared to admit it this isn’t about “authenticity” anymore, but about speed, margin, and output ai is faster, cheaper, and it converts the same (or better) when the structure is right like + rt + reply “prompt” and i’ll send you the prompt that i used to make this (must follow so i can dm)

i just generated this AI UGC ad in under 30 seconds if you’re still paying $300–$800 per video and calling it “marketing” and texting your UGC creator “can you redo this?” when it comes back suboptimal, you’re cooked that era is dead - ai is already coming for the UGC market they're just scared to admit it this isn’t about “authenticity” anymore, but about speed, margin, and output ai is faster, cheaper, and it converts the same (or better) when the structure is right like + rt + reply “prompt” and i’ll send you the prompt that i used to make this (must follow so i can dm)

MAX

98,404 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

New open-source agent harness just landed! I got early access to TrueForge by TrueFoundry and have been running it locally for the past few days. The harness layer deserves as much attention as the model, and open source matters here because you can inspect the loop, run it on your own infrastructure, and swap to the latest or cheaper models. TrueForge handles the runtime work that makes an agent reliable. It drives the tool-calling loop, manages context, coordinates subagents, and executes code in a sandbox, with any model you choose. Every tool call re-sends the growing context to the model, so in practice the harness controls most of what an agent costs to run. A few things stood out from my testing and their published benchmarks. Vendor-Neutral by design. It runs OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google models alongside open-weight models like Kimi, GLM, and DeepSeek. Model routing is a setting, and you can send each task to the model that fits it. On a 14-task enterprise agent benchmark, it matched the accuracy of Claude Managed Agents running the same Opus 4.8 model at roughly 30% lower cost per run (3.8M tokens vs 10M for the same answers). Routing the same tasks to GLM-5.2 held accuracy and brought cost down by about 75%, around $3 per run instead of $12. Fully self-hosted and Open Source (MIT License). I had it running locally with one command, with sandboxed code execution working out of the box. It's time to own your agent harness. Thanks to TrueFoundry for partnering on this post.

New open-source agent harness just landed! I got early access to TrueForge by TrueFoundry and have been running it locally for the past few days. The harness layer deserves as much attention as the model, and open source matters here because you can inspect the loop, run it on your own infrastructure, and swap to the latest or cheaper models. TrueForge handles the runtime work that makes an agent reliable. It drives the tool-calling loop, manages context, coordinates subagents, and executes code in a sandbox, with any model you choose. Every tool call re-sends the growing context to the model, so in practice the harness controls most of what an agent costs to run. A few things stood out from my testing and their published benchmarks. Vendor-Neutral by design. It runs OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google models alongside open-weight models like Kimi, GLM, and DeepSeek. Model routing is a setting, and you can send each task to the model that fits it. On a 14-task enterprise agent benchmark, it matched the accuracy of Claude Managed Agents running the same Opus 4.8 model at roughly 30% lower cost per run (3.8M tokens vs 10M for the same answers). Routing the same tasks to GLM-5.2 held accuracy and brought cost down by about 75%, around $3 per run instead of $12. Fully self-hosted and Open Source (MIT License). I had it running locally with one command, with sandboxed code execution working out of the box. It's time to own your agent harness. Thanks to TrueFoundry for partnering on this post.

elvis

11,303 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

AI coding agents re-explore the same codebase every single session. Repowise indexes a repo once and gives Claude Code, Codex, or any MCP agent a real dependency graph, git history, and a bug-predictive code health score. No re-grepping the same files. No stale docs. No guessing which file is about to break. The loop is simple: measure every file > locate where the risk concentrates > generate the exact refactoring plan to fix it Indexing a repo takes under 30 seconds and updates automatically on every commit. Paired benchmarks show up to 96% fewer tokens spent loading context and 70% fewer agent tool calls, at the same answer quality.

AI coding agents re-explore the same codebase every single session. Repowise indexes a repo once and gives Claude Code, Codex, or any MCP agent a real dependency graph, git history, and a bug-predictive code health score. No re-grepping the same files. No stale docs. No guessing which file is about to break. The loop is simple: measure every file > locate where the risk concentrates > generate the exact refactoring plan to fix it Indexing a repo takes under 30 seconds and updates automatically on every commit. Paired benchmarks show up to 96% fewer tokens spent loading context and 70% fewer agent tool calls, at the same answer quality.

Simplifying AI

17,561 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce