Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

I'm very impressed with Venice's YouTube summarization tool. I fed it a 55 minute Dutch podcast, and in just 115 seconds, it had already downloaded the audio, transcribed it, and produced a summary. I then had to translate it from English to Dutch, which took a few more seconds....

24,402 views • 4 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

I just compared Claude Code vs Codex vs Cursor CLI The task was to build a Next.js app with Tailwind 4 and shadcn components to collect customer feedback and showcase it with a widget. I gave all three the same prompt and let them go for 30 minutes to see what they came up with. Claude Code with Opus 4.1 Even though I told it to set up the app in the existing project folder, it tried to create a directory for it. After I interrupted and told it not to do that, it built a demo form and landing page with no errors. I had to ask it to make the demo interactive so users could submit a testimonial and preview it. The landing page looked like AI and was pretty basic, but it worked and it was done in a fraction of the time of the others. Total tokens used: 33k Codex with GPT-5 At the end of the 30 minutes I just could not get Codex to produce a working app. It got stuck in a loop of not being able to set up Tailwind 4 and despite many, MANY, attempts, I ended up with a "failed to compile" error. Total tokens used: 102k Cursor Agent with GPT-5 This was the slowest agent by far and a couple of times I actually thought it got stuck in a loop and was close to Ctrl+C'ing to cancel it. The TUI is really nice though, especially how it shows diffs and it did eventually build a working app (after one or two slight errors that needed fixing) The demo was interactive and it had a very minimal design that looked bare but also a lot less like an "AI generated" app than the Opus 4.1 design. It also wasn't too chatty and just did what it needed to do! Code quality was on a par with Opus 4.1, but it did use 5.5x as many tokens to get there. Still cheaper than Opus on a direct comparison but not when you factor in a Claude Code Max subscription. Total tokens: 188k I'll be able to do a proper comparison and record some videos when I'm back from holiday but for now, Opus is still the more capable model out of the box and Claude Code is the more complete CLI product. It will be interesting to see how Cursor evolve their CLI though with commands and subagents because I think with GPT-5 they have a real shot at providing competition for Claude Code if they can optimise output to get similar quality with less tokens. Jump to 0:40 in the video to see the two apps. Which do you think is which? ;)

Ian Nuttall

194,949 views • 1 year ago

I asked Garry Tan how to use meta prompting to get better at AI: "My partners at YC Jared Friedman and Pete Koomen showed me how to do this. You can take almost anything that you do all the time and just drop it into a context window. And then say, “Here’s a bunch of inputs and outputs." And maybe you also add a bunch of notes. And then you tell it, “Write me a prompt that can act as an agent that takes this input and makes this output over here.” You can do this for almost any type of knowledge work. And you can even introspect. "What are things you notice that I did to convert this from the input to the output?”. And then you can just start using the prompt. Initially, it’s going to suck. Because it’s just not that smart yet. But what’s funny is now, I also use it to Iterate my writing. You can be very direct, "I would never say that", "Don’t say it like this", or "Oh, you used the long word there, use the short word". Just speak to it conversationally. And then when you're happy with the output, you can use that new output to make a new prompt. "Based on this conversation, give me a better initial prompt that incorporates all the things we talked about." And you can do this with literally everything. And in theory, there’s so much it applies to that people do day-to-day. You could use it for tweets. You could use it for editing podcasts. You can use it for pretty much everything. I have a folder of prompts that I use all the time. My YouTube prompt is on v27 or something. I'll go through this process with all the different max models. I'll use GPT 5.2 Pro. I’ll use Grok. I'll use Claude. Then, I’ll take all the outputs from all the models and put them into Claude and say "Here’s my prompt, here’s the output from four LLMs, including yourself. Rate each response and tell me what the pros and cons of each approach are." And I usually say "give it to me in numbered form". And then you can agree with one, disagree with two, tell it three is this or that. And then after that, you say given all of this, synthesize it."

The Peel

51,632 views • 5 months ago

The post-match interview with captain Simone Gianelli, his mentality:"I'm very competitive, I don't like losing, and when I lose, I take responsibility." 🔥 Simo: I'm very happy with the match. As I was telling you before this match, we needed to figure out what we could do better. I think we figured it out and did it. So I'm very happy for the team, for all the players, because they deserved to be in the top four in the world, and we did it with a convincing performance, I'd say. So I'm very, very happy. My teammates were really good, they played an extraordinary match. - You just mentioned it, we talked about it a few days ago in an interview. You said, 'I rewatched the match against Belgium, I know exactly what we have to do now.' Where does all this calmness come from? Because Fefe also said it: 'We analyze it, Simone looks at his game, I look at mine, we don't always agree, but here it ends well.' Simo: "Yes, yes, I don't want to leave anything to chance. I'm very competitive, I don't like losing, and when I lose, I take responsibility. I know what I can do better, and in the first match against Belgium, I didn't play at my best, and I was disappointed about that, not so much for myself personally, but for not having contributed to my team, although fortunately Ricky took care of it and brought the match to a tie-break. So I analyzed it, I watched it again in my room, I analyzed it, and I knew, I was pretty sure, what I could have done better and differently about that part. We're not superheroes, so today it went well and everything else, but basically, I wanted to enter the match more prepared than I had come into the game. - How much did that lob in the first set excite us, Simone, but how much did you look for it, want it, think about it? Simo: You know, I'm not very good at that lob. I usually do it differently. I was talking to the My teammates, that long lob usually comes out a little crooked, a little wrong, but the situation arose, so I said, why not, let's try it, I saw them skip past me, so it went well. -Captain, hats off for today, really, thank you.

joey, and flower 🌼

24,119 views • 10 months ago