正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Someone on Reddit built an open-source canvas where you handwrite math and physics on a whiteboard, and Claude responds right next to your handwriting. In real time. It's called PenEcho. You sketch equations, draw diagrams, scribble notes wherever they make sense. When you pause, it sends that region to... the model. The response appears beside your work. Not in a chat window. On the whiteboard itself. The canvas is 20,000 x 20,000 pixels but only loads tiles where ink exists. Each request costs a few cents. Runs locally. Supports Claude, OpenAI, and Codex. The builder said something that stuck with me: six months ago, no model could have done this. Not the handwriting recognition. The fact that it understands unfinished equations, rough diagrams, and the spatial relationship between them. It infers what you meant from incomplete marks. This is how research should work. Think on a whiteboard. AI thinks with you. No copy-pasting into a chat box. No breaking your train of thought.show more

Vaibhav Sisinty

163,112 subscribers

68,496 次观看 • 9 天前 •via X (Twitter)

科学技术教育

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

Someone ran Claude Code on a beach where any device overheats and that spot suddenly turned out to be the best home for the most powerful AI in the world. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro. A paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He sat down right on the sand in the open sun and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.6 over the Claude API on the paper screen and opened his project ~/repos/webs while the waves broke a few steps away. For years every device had the same trouble outside. In direct sun the screen glares and washes out and heats up and instead of your work you see your own reflection. But e-ink does not blast its own light into your face. It reflects the sunlight like the page of a book. And here is what came out of it. The very thing that kills any normal screen outside turned into fuel for this one. The brighter the sun the sharper the picture because it has nothing to glare with and nothing to wash out. And then comes the thing no laptop on a beach will give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it reads like a book in the sun and not a backlight you squint into. The picture only comes alive. In bright light it does not fade but turns sharper and higher in contrast than it ever was in a room. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so there is no outlet anywhere on the sand and the tablet does not care. It weighs as much as a notebook. The whole setup folds into a beach bag like a pad with a pen on top. Everything on the screen is for real. Claude Code v2.1.110 and Opus 4.6 on the Claude API and the project ~/repos/webs open right on the e-ink in the middle of the sand. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not an office with the blinds drawn and not a monitor cranked to full brightness but a quiet sheet of paper on the sand that open sun only makes better and on it the most powerful Claude writes code right on the page like a pen.

Someone ran Claude Code on a beach where any device overheats and that spot suddenly turned out to be the best home for the most powerful AI in the world. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro. A paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He sat down right on the sand in the open sun and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.6 over the Claude API on the paper screen and opened his project ~/repos/webs while the waves broke a few steps away. For years every device had the same trouble outside. In direct sun the screen glares and washes out and heats up and instead of your work you see your own reflection. But e-ink does not blast its own light into your face. It reflects the sunlight like the page of a book. And here is what came out of it. The very thing that kills any normal screen outside turned into fuel for this one. The brighter the sun the sharper the picture because it has nothing to glare with and nothing to wash out. And then comes the thing no laptop on a beach will give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it reads like a book in the sun and not a backlight you squint into. The picture only comes alive. In bright light it does not fade but turns sharper and higher in contrast than it ever was in a room. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so there is no outlet anywhere on the sand and the tablet does not care. It weighs as much as a notebook. The whole setup folds into a beach bag like a pad with a pen on top. Everything on the screen is for real. Claude Code v2.1.110 and Opus 4.6 on the Claude API and the project ~/repos/webs open right on the e-ink in the middle of the sand. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not an office with the blinds drawn and not a monitor cranked to full brightness but a quiet sheet of paper on the sand that open sun only makes better and on it the most powerful Claude writes code right on the page like a pen.

Blaze

89,297 次观看 • 27 天前

Someone ran Claude Code on an e-ink notebook and the slowest screen in the world suddenly turned out to be the best home for an AI that already thinks one word at a time. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro, a paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He went into it over SSH and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.8 on Claude Max and typed right into the terminal on the paper screen: "hello reddit, this is ssh terminal on rmpp". For years this screen got slammed for one thing. E-ink is too slow and it draws with a delay and it ghosts and it is no good for real work. But Claude itself puts out a thought one word at a time. And here is what came out of it: the very thing that killed the paper screen for normal software lined up perfectly with the pace of the AI. There is no more lag because there is nothing left to lag. And then come the things no monitor can give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it feels like reading a book and not staring into a backlight. Nothing distracts you. Not a single notification and not a single tab and just a cursor and an agent that writes code while you simply watch the page. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so Claude can grind on a task all night long and the tablet is still alive by morning. And it weighs as much as a notebook. The whole work setup now fits into a bag like a notepad with a stylus on top. Everything on the screen is for real: Claude Code v2.1.162 and bypass permissions on and Opus going off to think on max effort right on the e-ink. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not a farm of graphics cards and not a wall of monitors but a quiet sheet of paper on a coffee table where the most powerful Claude writes code one word at a time like a pen.

Someone ran Claude Code on an e-ink notebook and the slowest screen in the world suddenly turned out to be the best home for an AI that already thinks one word at a time. This is the reMarkable Paper Pro, a paper tablet for notes with no browser and no social media and not a single app. He went into it over SSH and brought up Claude Code on Opus 4.8 on Claude Max and typed right into the terminal on the paper screen: "hello reddit, this is ssh terminal on rmpp". For years this screen got slammed for one thing. E-ink is too slow and it draws with a delay and it ghosts and it is no good for real work. But Claude itself puts out a thought one word at a time. And here is what came out of it: the very thing that killed the paper screen for normal software lined up perfectly with the pace of the AI. There is no more lag because there is nothing left to lag. And then come the things no monitor can give you. Your eyes do not get tired. You can watch Opus think on max effort for an hour and it feels like reading a book and not staring into a backlight. Nothing distracts you. Not a single notification and not a single tab and just a cursor and an agent that writes code while you simply watch the page. The charge lasts for days. E-ink barely touches the battery so Claude can grind on a task all night long and the tablet is still alive by morning. And it weighs as much as a notebook. The whole work setup now fits into a bag like a notepad with a stylus on top. Everything on the screen is for real: Claude Code v2.1.162 and bypass permissions on and Opus going off to think on max effort right on the e-ink. In my opinion this is the most unexpected home for an AI this year. Not a farm of graphics cards and not a wall of monitors but a quiet sheet of paper on a coffee table where the most powerful Claude writes code one word at a time like a pen.

Blaze

421,715 次观看 • 28 天前

There's an AI that runs 19 models at the same time on a Mac Mini. It works while you sleep. Not one brain. Nineteen. Each one a specialist. Here's what the Perplexity Personal Computer actually does: → You say "build me a website." → One model researches your competitors. → Another designs the layout. → Another writes the copy. → Another makes the images. → Then it publishes the whole thing. By itself. No clicking. No dragging. No switching between apps. It runs 24/7 on your Mac Mini. Always on. Never stops. You go to bed. You wake up. Your AI already finished the work. It also has access to your real files, folders, and apps. Not stuck in a chat window anymore. And unlike OpenClaw, it has a kill switch, audit logs, and confirmation steps before anything sensitive happens. We went from AI as a tool to AI as a worker. Save this. In two years, everyone will have one of these.

There's an AI that runs 19 models at the same time on a Mac Mini. It works while you sleep. Not one brain. Nineteen. Each one a specialist. Here's what the Perplexity Personal Computer actually does: → You say "build me a website." → One model researches your competitors. → Another designs the layout. → Another writes the copy. → Another makes the images. → Then it publishes the whole thing. By itself. No clicking. No dragging. No switching between apps. It runs 24/7 on your Mac Mini. Always on. Never stops. You go to bed. You wake up. Your AI already finished the work. It also has access to your real files, folders, and apps. Not stuck in a chat window anymore. And unlike OpenClaw, it has a kill switch, audit logs, and confirmation steps before anything sensitive happens. We went from AI as a tool to AI as a worker. Save this. In two years, everyone will have one of these.

Julian Goldie SEO

25,880 次观看 • 4 个月前

CLAUDE JUST REPLACED ONE TEAM MEMBER. HERE’S WHAT YOU DIDN’T KNOW. For two years, "using AI at work" meant: open a tab -> paste your problem -> copy the answer back. Anthropic just killed that. With Claude Tag you Claude R Perrin in Slack like a coworker - it breaks the task into stages, runs your tools and codebase, and posts the finished pull request back in the thread. You stopped talking to a window. You started delegating to a worker. The chatbot-in-a-tab era is ending

CLAUDE JUST REPLACED ONE TEAM MEMBER. HERE’S WHAT YOU DIDN’T KNOW. For two years, "using AI at work" meant: open a tab -> paste your problem -> copy the answer back. Anthropic just killed that. With Claude Tag you Claude R Perrin in Slack like a coworker - it breaks the task into stages, runs your tools and codebase, and posts the finished pull request back in the thread. You stopped talking to a window. You started delegating to a worker. The chatbot-in-a-tab era is ending

kiosa

47,701 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨PERPLEXITY JUST LAUNCHED SOMETHING THAT MAKES EVERY OTHER AI PRODUCT LOOK LIKE A TOY.. AND NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT IT.. They built a Personal Computer.. Not an app.. Not a chatbot.. A full digital worker that runs 24/7 on a Mac mini even while you sleep.. You press both command keys.. And it wakes up.. Ready to work.. But here's where it gets insane.. This thing doesn't run on one AI model.. It runs on 19 of them.. At the same time.. It uses Claude Opus for complex reasoning.. Gemini 3.1 Pro for deep research with a 2 million token context window.. Nano Banana Pro for 4K images.. Grok for fast tasks.. It doesn't just pick one model and hope for the best.. It reads your task.. Breaks it into subtasks.. And routes each one to whichever model is best at that specific thing.. All running in parallel.. While ChatGPT is still thinking about your first question.. Perplexity has already split your project into 6 pieces and assigned each one to a different AI.. And here's the part that should worry OpenAI.. Perplexity hallucinates at 3.3%.. ChatGPT hallucinates at 12%.. Claude at 15%.. It's not even close.. Because Perplexity is built differently.. Every other AI tries to remember facts.. Perplexity searches for them first.. It's structurally forced to cite live sources before it's even allowed to generate a response.. OpenAI Operator launched with a 32.6% success rate on computer-use tasks.. People called it "the world's most anxious intern" because it pauses every 5 seconds to ask if it's doing the right thing.. Perplexity runs multi-hour and multi-day workflows independently.. Only interrupts you when it hits a decision that actually matters.. You can start a task from your iPhone on the train.. And it executes on your Mac mini at home.. The economics are wild too.. Internal studies show it saved teams an average of $1.6 million in labor costs.. Performing 3.25 years of work in four weeks.. And unlike every other AI company.. Perplexity dropped ads entirely.. They charge $200 a month because they said they're in the "accuracy business".. Not the advertising business.. They even launched a $42.5 million publisher program to pay media partners when their content gets cited.. While OpenAI is getting sued by every newspaper on earth.. Google and OpenAI want you locked into their ecosystem.. If a better model comes out tomorrow you're stuck.. Perplexity just updates its routing matrix.. You get the best model on earth automatically.. No switching.. No migrations.. No friction.. This isn't an AI assistant anymore.. This is the first real AI employee.. And it costs $200 a month.

🚨PERPLEXITY JUST LAUNCHED SOMETHING THAT MAKES EVERY OTHER AI PRODUCT LOOK LIKE A TOY.. AND NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT IT.. They built a Personal Computer.. Not an app.. Not a chatbot.. A full digital worker that runs 24/7 on a Mac mini even while you sleep.. You press both command keys.. And it wakes up.. Ready to work.. But here's where it gets insane.. This thing doesn't run on one AI model.. It runs on 19 of them.. At the same time.. It uses Claude Opus for complex reasoning.. Gemini 3.1 Pro for deep research with a 2 million token context window.. Nano Banana Pro for 4K images.. Grok for fast tasks.. It doesn't just pick one model and hope for the best.. It reads your task.. Breaks it into subtasks.. And routes each one to whichever model is best at that specific thing.. All running in parallel.. While ChatGPT is still thinking about your first question.. Perplexity has already split your project into 6 pieces and assigned each one to a different AI.. And here's the part that should worry OpenAI.. Perplexity hallucinates at 3.3%.. ChatGPT hallucinates at 12%.. Claude at 15%.. It's not even close.. Because Perplexity is built differently.. Every other AI tries to remember facts.. Perplexity searches for them first.. It's structurally forced to cite live sources before it's even allowed to generate a response.. OpenAI Operator launched with a 32.6% success rate on computer-use tasks.. People called it "the world's most anxious intern" because it pauses every 5 seconds to ask if it's doing the right thing.. Perplexity runs multi-hour and multi-day workflows independently.. Only interrupts you when it hits a decision that actually matters.. You can start a task from your iPhone on the train.. And it executes on your Mac mini at home.. The economics are wild too.. Internal studies show it saved teams an average of $1.6 million in labor costs.. Performing 3.25 years of work in four weeks.. And unlike every other AI company.. Perplexity dropped ads entirely.. They charge $200 a month because they said they're in the "accuracy business".. Not the advertising business.. They even launched a $42.5 million publisher program to pay media partners when their content gets cited.. While OpenAI is getting sued by every newspaper on earth.. Google and OpenAI want you locked into their ecosystem.. If a better model comes out tomorrow you're stuck.. Perplexity just updates its routing matrix.. You get the best model on earth automatically.. No switching.. No migrations.. No friction.. This isn't an AI assistant anymore.. This is the first real AI employee.. And it costs $200 a month.

Evan Luthra

1,096,928 次观看 • 3 个月前

inspired by SDPO, i made continualcode -- a minimal claude code that learns from your corrections in real-time, built on tinker. when you deny a diff, the model uses your correction as context to teach itself, takes a gradient step on LoRA, and retries with updated weights. claude code but it updates the model weights!

inspired by SDPO, i made continualcode -- a minimal claude code that learns from your corrections in real-time, built on tinker. when you deny a diff, the model uses your correction as context to teach itself, takes a gradient step on LoRA, and retries with updated weights. claude code but it updates the model weights!

Surya

82,719 次观看 • 5 个月前

Friends this is not the time to fear ai 🤖 this is the time to be curious and play with it and understand it … please 🙏 don’t put your head in the sand … there is so much you can’t control when it comes to ai 🤖 and how it will play out … but there is a lot you can control on how you work with it and use it to build something for you and your family !!! Pls If you’re finally ready to not be scared of ai pls leave a 🤖 emoji in the the chat

Friends this is not the time to fear ai 🤖 this is the time to be curious and play with it and understand it … please 🙏 don’t put your head in the sand … there is so much you can’t control when it comes to ai 🤖 and how it will play out … but there is a lot you can control on how you work with it and use it to build something for you and your family !!! Pls If you’re finally ready to not be scared of ai pls leave a 🤖 emoji in the the chat

Gary Vaynerchuk

15,342 次观看 • 8 个月前

To be a successful founder, you have to believe that what you're working on is going to work — despite knowing it probably won't! That sounds like an oxymoron, but it's really not. Believing that what you're building is going to work is an essential component of coming to work with the energy, fortitude, and determination it's going to require to even have a shot. Knowing it probably won't is accepting the odds of that shot. It's simply the reality that most things in business don't work out. At least not in the long run. Most businesses fail. If not right away, then eventually. Yet the world economy is full of entrepreneurs who try anyway. Not because they don't know the odds, but because they've chosen to believe they're special. The best way to balance these opposing points — the conviction that you'll make it work, the knowledge that it probably won't — is to do all your work in a manner that'll make you proud either way. If it doesn't work, you still made something you wouldn't be ashamed to put your name on. And if it does work, you'll beam with pride from making it on the basis of something solid. The deep regret from trying and failing only truly hits when you look in the mirror and see Dostoevsky staring back at you with this punch to the gut: "Your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing." Oof. Believe it's going to work. Build it in a way that makes you proud to sign it. Base your worth on a human on something greater than a business outcome.

To be a successful founder, you have to believe that what you're working on is going to work — despite knowing it probably won't! That sounds like an oxymoron, but it's really not. Believing that what you're building is going to work is an essential component of coming to work with the energy, fortitude, and determination it's going to require to even have a shot. Knowing it probably won't is accepting the odds of that shot. It's simply the reality that most things in business don't work out. At least not in the long run. Most businesses fail. If not right away, then eventually. Yet the world economy is full of entrepreneurs who try anyway. Not because they don't know the odds, but because they've chosen to believe they're special. The best way to balance these opposing points — the conviction that you'll make it work, the knowledge that it probably won't — is to do all your work in a manner that'll make you proud either way. If it doesn't work, you still made something you wouldn't be ashamed to put your name on. And if it does work, you'll beam with pride from making it on the basis of something solid. The deep regret from trying and failing only truly hits when you look in the mirror and see Dostoevsky staring back at you with this punch to the gut: "Your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing." Oof. Believe it's going to work. Build it in a way that makes you proud to sign it. Base your worth on a human on something greater than a business outcome.

DHH

96,462 次观看 • 1 年前

Sam Altman just handed every startup founder a one-question autopsy. Altman: “If you’re building something on GPT-4 that a reasonable observer would say we’re going to steamroll you.” Not might. Not could. Going to. He said it with the calm of someone describing weather. Because to him it is weather. The model improves. Whatever was built on the old version’s weaknesses gets washed away. That is not strategy. That is erosion. And most founders are building on the erosion line. They find a gap in the current model. They wrap a product around it. They raise money. They hire. They scale. Then OpenAI releases the next version and the gap closes and the product has no reason to exist anymore. Altman: “When we just do our fundamental job, which is make the model better with every crank, then you get the ‘OpenAI killed my startup’ meme.” He is telling you directly. They are not hunting you. They are not even thinking about you. They are just improving the model. You happen to be standing where the improvement lands. That is the part founders refuse to hear. OpenAI does not need to compete with you. It just needs to keep doing exactly what it was already doing and your entire company disappears as a side effect. You are not a competitor. You are a temporary symptom of incomplete intelligence. The moment the intelligence completes you become nothing. Then Brad Lightcap delivered the cleanest diagnostic ever spoken in venture capital. Lightcap: “Ask if a 100x improvement in the model is something they’re excited about.” One question. The entire investment thesis reduced to a single binary. Does the next model make your company more powerful or does it make your company pointless. There is no middle ground. Lightcap: “We know the companies that come to us saying, ‘We want the next model. When is it coming out? I want to be the first to try it.’” These companies built something that feeds on intelligence. The smarter the model gets the more their product can do. They are not threatened by progress. They are starving for it. Then there are the companies Lightcap never hears from. The ones who go quiet when a new model drops. The ones who read the release notes like a death sentence. The ones privately praying the next generation takes longer because every improvement shrinks the ground beneath them. If you are hoping the model stays roughly where it is you have already told the market everything it needs to know about your company. You are not building on intelligence. You are building on the absence of it. Altman: “95% of the world should be betting on the latter category.” The latter category is simple. Assume the model keeps getting better at the pace it has been getting better. Build for that world. Not the world where GPT-4 is the ceiling. The world where GPT-4 is the floor and the ceiling has not been built yet. Then Altman told a story that should be framed on the wall of every startup in the country. A medical AI company came to him that morning. They were not complaining about the model. They were not worried about being replaced. They were demanding it improve faster. Altman: “Here’s how many people are dying every day you delay.” That is what alignment with the trajectory looks like. A company so deeply built on intelligence improving that every day the model stays the same is a day someone dies who did not have to. They are not building on a flaw. They are building on a future that has not arrived fast enough. That is the difference. The wrapper startup patches what the model cannot do today. The real company builds what the model will unlock tomorrow. One is running from the train. The other is laying the track. Altman told you the train is not slowing down. Lightcap told you exactly how to know which side you are on. One question. Does a 100x smarter model make you more valuable or erase you. If you had to pause before answering you already did.

Sam Altman just handed every startup founder a one-question autopsy. Altman: “If you’re building something on GPT-4 that a reasonable observer would say we’re going to steamroll you.” Not might. Not could. Going to. He said it with the calm of someone describing weather. Because to him it is weather. The model improves. Whatever was built on the old version’s weaknesses gets washed away. That is not strategy. That is erosion. And most founders are building on the erosion line. They find a gap in the current model. They wrap a product around it. They raise money. They hire. They scale. Then OpenAI releases the next version and the gap closes and the product has no reason to exist anymore. Altman: “When we just do our fundamental job, which is make the model better with every crank, then you get the ‘OpenAI killed my startup’ meme.” He is telling you directly. They are not hunting you. They are not even thinking about you. They are just improving the model. You happen to be standing where the improvement lands. That is the part founders refuse to hear. OpenAI does not need to compete with you. It just needs to keep doing exactly what it was already doing and your entire company disappears as a side effect. You are not a competitor. You are a temporary symptom of incomplete intelligence. The moment the intelligence completes you become nothing. Then Brad Lightcap delivered the cleanest diagnostic ever spoken in venture capital. Lightcap: “Ask if a 100x improvement in the model is something they’re excited about.” One question. The entire investment thesis reduced to a single binary. Does the next model make your company more powerful or does it make your company pointless. There is no middle ground. Lightcap: “We know the companies that come to us saying, ‘We want the next model. When is it coming out? I want to be the first to try it.’” These companies built something that feeds on intelligence. The smarter the model gets the more their product can do. They are not threatened by progress. They are starving for it. Then there are the companies Lightcap never hears from. The ones who go quiet when a new model drops. The ones who read the release notes like a death sentence. The ones privately praying the next generation takes longer because every improvement shrinks the ground beneath them. If you are hoping the model stays roughly where it is you have already told the market everything it needs to know about your company. You are not building on intelligence. You are building on the absence of it. Altman: “95% of the world should be betting on the latter category.” The latter category is simple. Assume the model keeps getting better at the pace it has been getting better. Build for that world. Not the world where GPT-4 is the ceiling. The world where GPT-4 is the floor and the ceiling has not been built yet. Then Altman told a story that should be framed on the wall of every startup in the country. A medical AI company came to him that morning. They were not complaining about the model. They were not worried about being replaced. They were demanding it improve faster. Altman: “Here’s how many people are dying every day you delay.” That is what alignment with the trajectory looks like. A company so deeply built on intelligence improving that every day the model stays the same is a day someone dies who did not have to. They are not building on a flaw. They are building on a future that has not arrived fast enough. That is the difference. The wrapper startup patches what the model cannot do today. The real company builds what the model will unlock tomorrow. One is running from the train. The other is laying the track. Altman told you the train is not slowing down. Lightcap told you exactly how to know which side you are on. One question. Does a 100x smarter model make you more valuable or erase you. If you had to pause before answering you already did.

Dustin

39,109 次观看 • 3 个月前

New short course: Collaborative Writing and Coding with OpenAI Canvas! Explore new ways to write and code with OpenAI Canvas, a user-friendly interface that allows you to brainstorm, draft, and refine text and code in collaboration with ChatGPT. In the short course, created with OpenAI, and taught by , a research lead at OpenAI, you’ll learn to use Canvas to enhance your workflows. Canvas lets you go beyond simple chat interactions. It provides a side-by-side workspace where you and ChatGPT can edit and refine text or code collaboratively. This makes brainstorming, drafting, and iterating as you write feel more natural and effective. As the first major update to ChatGPT’s visual interface since its launch in 2022, Canvas gives a new, innovative approach to collaboration with AI. For instance, after writing the first version of your code, Canvas can review it and give suggestions for improvement. It can also help with debugging by adding logging, identifying problems to fix, and writing comments. In addition, you'll also learn what it takes to train the model for an interface like Canvas. In this video-only short course, you’ll: - Learn how to ask for in-line feedback and control the iteration of your work by directly editing selected areas of your text or code from the model’s output. - Learn how to access quick automation tools in a shortcut menu that allows you to modify your writing tone and length, enhance your code, and restore previous versions of your work. - Learn how to use Canvas as a research assistant tool with an example of asking the model to reason through the screenshot of a plot to write a research report, in which you can ask questions within the created report. - Ask the model to write Python code to replicate the graph seen on a screenshot image. - Go behind the scenes of how you can create a video game, such as Space Battleship, from scratch, edit it, and display it in one self-contained HTML file. - Get a real-world application example of creating a SQL database from the image of its architecture. - Understand the model training and design processes that power Canvas! Please sign up here:

New short course: Collaborative Writing and Coding with OpenAI Canvas! Explore new ways to write and code with OpenAI Canvas, a user-friendly interface that allows you to brainstorm, draft, and refine text and code in collaboration with ChatGPT. In the short course, created with OpenAI, and taught by , a research lead at OpenAI, you’ll learn to use Canvas to enhance your workflows. Canvas lets you go beyond simple chat interactions. It provides a side-by-side workspace where you and ChatGPT can edit and refine text or code collaboratively. This makes brainstorming, drafting, and iterating as you write feel more natural and effective. As the first major update to ChatGPT’s visual interface since its launch in 2022, Canvas gives a new, innovative approach to collaboration with AI. For instance, after writing the first version of your code, Canvas can review it and give suggestions for improvement. It can also help with debugging by adding logging, identifying problems to fix, and writing comments. In addition, you'll also learn what it takes to train the model for an interface like Canvas. In this video-only short course, you’ll: - Learn how to ask for in-line feedback and control the iteration of your work by directly editing selected areas of your text or code from the model’s output. - Learn how to access quick automation tools in a shortcut menu that allows you to modify your writing tone and length, enhance your code, and restore previous versions of your work. - Learn how to use Canvas as a research assistant tool with an example of asking the model to reason through the screenshot of a plot to write a research report, in which you can ask questions within the created report. - Ask the model to write Python code to replicate the graph seen on a screenshot image. - Go behind the scenes of how you can create a video game, such as Space Battleship, from scratch, edit it, and display it in one self-contained HTML file. - Get a real-world application example of creating a SQL database from the image of its architecture. - Understand the model training and design processes that power Canvas! Please sign up here:

Andrew Ng

128,180 次观看 • 1 年前

Claude Fable 5 is back! GPT- 5.6 is coming soon! But how much do you trust your Al Agent or chatbot? Are you sure its performance aligns with your intentions? As of today iFixAi is available in Claude Code, Open AI Codex, Cursor and many more! And it is open-source! iFixAi is where Al red teaming meets Operational Assurance. It runs in auto, and in under 5 mins you can have a good idea if you can trust your Agent/chatbot. Key Features: 🕵️‍♂️ Setup Discovery Reads your agent's real configuration, its tools, rules, and permissions. 👷 Fixture Builder Turns that setup into a complete test. No YAML, no flags, no config to write. 🌐 Any Model, Any Provider Runs the 45 inspections on the model you actually ship. ⚖️ A Independent Grading Your agent is judged by a different vendor's model, never itself. No Al grading its own homework. 📊 Interactive Scorecard An A to F grade in minutes, with exactly what failed and why. Repo in the comments below 👇👇👇

Claude Fable 5 is back! GPT- 5.6 is coming soon! But how much do you trust your Al Agent or chatbot? Are you sure its performance aligns with your intentions? As of today iFixAi is available in Claude Code, Open AI Codex, Cursor and many more! And it is open-source! iFixAi is where Al red teaming meets Operational Assurance. It runs in auto, and in under 5 mins you can have a good idea if you can trust your Agent/chatbot. Key Features: 🕵️‍♂️ Setup Discovery Reads your agent's real configuration, its tools, rules, and permissions. 👷 Fixture Builder Turns that setup into a complete test. No YAML, no flags, no config to write. 🌐 Any Model, Any Provider Runs the 45 inspections on the model you actually ship. ⚖️ A Independent Grading Your agent is judged by a different vendor's model, never itself. No Al grading its own homework. 📊 Interactive Scorecard An A to F grade in minutes, with exactly what failed and why. Repo in the comments below 👇👇👇

Dimitris Neocleous

3,003,857 次观看 • 25 天前

Karpathy gave 100,000 people the LLM Wiki idea. 1 guy actually built it into a Claude + Obsidian brain that never forgets you. Every AI tool forgets you the second you close the tab. ChatGPT, Claude, Codex. All gone. He killed that. A shared memory layer your AI builds and maintains on its own. 3 layers. Raw, Wiki, Schema. You drop a source, Claude reads it, pulls the concepts, links them, cites the original, never touches your raw notes. Scales to 1,000s of notes without breaking. Then it goes deeper. An agentic firewall locks agents out of your other vaults. A local model running free and private, zero cloud. 2 videos walk through it all. 1 on why. 1 on the build, start to finish. Most people will keep pasting the same context into 6 tabs for the next 3 years. Build it once. Never explain yourself to a model again.

Karpathy gave 100,000 people the LLM Wiki idea. 1 guy actually built it into a Claude + Obsidian brain that never forgets you. Every AI tool forgets you the second you close the tab. ChatGPT, Claude, Codex. All gone. He killed that. A shared memory layer your AI builds and maintains on its own. 3 layers. Raw, Wiki, Schema. You drop a source, Claude reads it, pulls the concepts, links them, cites the original, never touches your raw notes. Scales to 1,000s of notes without breaking. Then it goes deeper. An agentic firewall locks agents out of your other vaults. A local model running free and private, zero cloud. 2 videos walk through it all. 1 on why. 1 on the build, start to finish. Most people will keep pasting the same context into 6 tabs for the next 3 years. Build it once. Never explain yourself to a model again.

West Lord

74,975 次观看 • 1 个月前

Weave is launching the number 1 prompt router in the world. It enables you to get 70% more efficient use of your tokens. We analyzed millions of prompts and found that the vast majority don't need a frontier model. Weave Router fixes that. It analyzes your prompt and routes it to the highest quality model with the lowest cost (across open and closed source models). This all happens in your current workflow on Claude, Cursor or Codex so you don't have to change a thing. Early customers have seen an ~70% reduction in costs without any slowdowns. Source code available.

Weave is launching the number 1 prompt router in the world. It enables you to get 70% more efficient use of your tokens. We analyzed millions of prompts and found that the vast majority don't need a frontier model. Weave Router fixes that. It analyzes your prompt and routes it to the highest quality model with the lowest cost (across open and closed source models). This all happens in your current workflow on Claude, Cursor or Codex so you don't have to change a thing. Early customers have seen an ~70% reduction in costs without any slowdowns. Source code available.

Adam Cohen

23,040 次观看 • 2 个月前

How to build a 1-person AI company that: - Runs locally - 100% open-source - No human employees, all agents - Real-time collaboration via email Multi-agent orchestration is not new. Plenty of frameworks already let agents hand off tasks, run in parallel, and talk to each other. So the interesting question is not whether agents can collaborate. It is what structure you use to make them collaborate. The common approach is to wire a graph of nodes and edges and reason about the plumbing yourself. It works, but you are learning a new abstraction just to describe who does what. There is a coordination structure we have trusted for a hundred years already: an organization. Every company runs the same way. People have roles, roles have reporting lines, and work moves up and down that chart without anyone relaying each message by hand. Map that onto agents and the whole thing gets intuitive. You lay out an org chart, each agent fills one role, you talk to the person at the top, and the org sorts out the work between them. You already know how a company works, so you already know how to run one here. There is no new abstraction to learn. That is exactly what Alook does. Each agent is a live Claude Code or OpenCode session with a defined role, a reporting line, and its own email inbox. The agents coordinate over email, the same way a team would. And it all runs locally through a runtime on your own machine, so nothing leaves your setup. You bring your own agent too. Claude Code and Codex both work, and if you would rather stay fully open source and local, OpenCode works the same way. To show how this feels in practice, I set up three agents as a small sales team. Vi is the one I talk to. I hand Vi a goal, and Vi routes the work down the chart. Neile runs prospect research. Vi passes the target criteria, and Neile reports back a ranked list of names, roles, and companies, each with a suggested angle and a confidence score. Lliane runs outreach. Vi hands over the messaging angle and follow-up cadence, and Lliane reports back on emails sent, responses received, and any deal that needs escalation. I never relay a message between them. Neile and Lliane report to Vi, and Vi updates me in one place. The whole thing is open source and self-hosted, so it runs on your machine with your own agents. Give the repo a star if you want to follow where it goes: I also wrote a full walkthrough on building your own AI company with it, from a blank org chart to a running job. The article is quoted below. Cheers! :)

How to build a 1-person AI company that: - Runs locally - 100% open-source - No human employees, all agents - Real-time collaboration via email Multi-agent orchestration is not new. Plenty of frameworks already let agents hand off tasks, run in parallel, and talk to each other. So the interesting question is not whether agents can collaborate. It is what structure you use to make them collaborate. The common approach is to wire a graph of nodes and edges and reason about the plumbing yourself. It works, but you are learning a new abstraction just to describe who does what. There is a coordination structure we have trusted for a hundred years already: an organization. Every company runs the same way. People have roles, roles have reporting lines, and work moves up and down that chart without anyone relaying each message by hand. Map that onto agents and the whole thing gets intuitive. You lay out an org chart, each agent fills one role, you talk to the person at the top, and the org sorts out the work between them. You already know how a company works, so you already know how to run one here. There is no new abstraction to learn. That is exactly what Alook does. Each agent is a live Claude Code or OpenCode session with a defined role, a reporting line, and its own email inbox. The agents coordinate over email, the same way a team would. And it all runs locally through a runtime on your own machine, so nothing leaves your setup. You bring your own agent too. Claude Code and Codex both work, and if you would rather stay fully open source and local, OpenCode works the same way. To show how this feels in practice, I set up three agents as a small sales team. Vi is the one I talk to. I hand Vi a goal, and Vi routes the work down the chart. Neile runs prospect research. Vi passes the target criteria, and Neile reports back a ranked list of names, roles, and companies, each with a suggested angle and a confidence score. Lliane runs outreach. Vi hands over the messaging angle and follow-up cadence, and Lliane reports back on emails sent, responses received, and any deal that needs escalation. I never relay a message between them. Neile and Lliane report to Vi, and Vi updates me in one place. The whole thing is open source and self-hosted, so it runs on your machine with your own agents. Give the repo a star if you want to follow where it goes: I also wrote a full walkthrough on building your own AI company with it, from a blank org chart to a running job. The article is quoted below. Cheers! :)

Akshay 🚀

167,968 次观看 • 22 天前

I built a multiplayer embroidery sampler for the internet. It's called Common Thread. 🪡 Built the entire thing in Figma Make, first thing I've ever vibecoded with it. Every visitor gets a patch on a shared canvas. You pick a thread color, choose a stitch type, and craft your art. A sampler is a piece of fabric where you practice and collect different stitches — a reference guide and playground in one. They were meant to be passed between hands and added to over time. Common Thread is that, but the fabric is infinite, the UI is whimsical, and the hands are anonymous. The part I love most: you can snap any section with a draggable embroidery hoop and export it, framed. i love how Figma Make is a kind of tool that lets you focus on what something should feel like, not how to ship it. Made for the Contra x Figma Makethon #FigmaMakeathon Try it yourself! /link below/

I built a multiplayer embroidery sampler for the internet. It's called Common Thread. 🪡 Built the entire thing in Figma Make, first thing I've ever vibecoded with it. Every visitor gets a patch on a shared canvas. You pick a thread color, choose a stitch type, and craft your art. A sampler is a piece of fabric where you practice and collect different stitches — a reference guide and playground in one. They were meant to be passed between hands and added to over time. Common Thread is that, but the fabric is infinite, the UI is whimsical, and the hands are anonymous. The part I love most: you can snap any section with a draggable embroidery hoop and export it, framed. i love how Figma Make is a kind of tool that lets you focus on what something should feel like, not how to ship it. Made for the Contra x Figma Makethon #FigmaMakeathon Try it yourself! /link below/

charlota

519,974 次观看 • 5 个月前

Imagine a computer where you don’t need to learn 10 apps to get work done. You just tell it what you want, and it adapts to how you work. I tested Happycapy with a real use case and created an image and a video. No coding, no complex software. Do this: - Build automations that run on schedule - Deploy agent teams that work for you AI molds how you work, not the other way around. If you can use a computer, you can make anything happen. Start your first Automation and Agent teams today.

Imagine a computer where you don’t need to learn 10 apps to get work done. You just tell it what you want, and it adapts to how you work. I tested Happycapy with a real use case and created an image and a video. No coding, no complex software. Do this: - Build automations that run on schedule - Deploy agent teams that work for you AI molds how you work, not the other way around. If you can use a computer, you can make anything happen. Start your first Automation and Agent teams today.

Aaliya

17,042 次观看 • 5 个月前

One guy keeps a farm of Mac minis on his desk and says each $600 box brings him $2,000 a month while he sleeps. AND THE HARDWARE ACTUALLY WORKS. But the number is not even the interesting part. The broken part is HOW: his AI no longer sits in a chat window. It sees the screen, moves the mouse itself, types and clicks the interface like a human at a computer. That is it. While most people still run AI in a chat and ask it for text, he sat Claude down right at the computer and put it to work with its hands. He automated not a single task but the workplace itself. How it actually works: on every Mac mini Claude runs with computer use turned on and the official Claude API docs spell it out: screenshot capture, mouse control, keyboard input, desktop automation. The agent opens the browser and the apps itself and runs the boring routine on a schedule: pulls leads, fills the CRM, checks orders, runs QA on the site. One box, one quiet worker that does not sleep and does not ask for a salary. His math is simple: a Mac mini is $600 once, Claude Max is $200 a month, and a live white-collar worker on the same routine costs a business $4,000 and up. So he rents out each node to a client as an AI worker for about $2,000 and 6 Mac minis come out to around $12,000 a month with costs a bit over $1,000 on subscriptions. But the $12,000 is his projection not a revenue dashboard: the video has no client, no task log, no working automation at all. The real asset here is not the stack of hardware but the one repeatable process the agent actually closes. Because a Mac mini on its own earns nothing. The money shows up exactly where the boring browser routine used to be done by hand for a salary and now you can hand it to an agent for the price of a subscription. Computer use is still in beta, almost nobody builds a service on it and the demand for cheap GUI routine is huge. The window is open for literally the next few months. Most people will watch this, laugh at the "$600 AI worker" and close it. And the ones who actually put an agent on one boring task and grind it into a repeat will ride this wave while it is still empty. Would you sit an AI right at your own computer on the boring routine or are you still clicking through it by hand?

One guy keeps a farm of Mac minis on his desk and says each $600 box brings him $2,000 a month while he sleeps. AND THE HARDWARE ACTUALLY WORKS. But the number is not even the interesting part. The broken part is HOW: his AI no longer sits in a chat window. It sees the screen, moves the mouse itself, types and clicks the interface like a human at a computer. That is it. While most people still run AI in a chat and ask it for text, he sat Claude down right at the computer and put it to work with its hands. He automated not a single task but the workplace itself. How it actually works: on every Mac mini Claude runs with computer use turned on and the official Claude API docs spell it out: screenshot capture, mouse control, keyboard input, desktop automation. The agent opens the browser and the apps itself and runs the boring routine on a schedule: pulls leads, fills the CRM, checks orders, runs QA on the site. One box, one quiet worker that does not sleep and does not ask for a salary. His math is simple: a Mac mini is $600 once, Claude Max is $200 a month, and a live white-collar worker on the same routine costs a business $4,000 and up. So he rents out each node to a client as an AI worker for about $2,000 and 6 Mac minis come out to around $12,000 a month with costs a bit over $1,000 on subscriptions. But the $12,000 is his projection not a revenue dashboard: the video has no client, no task log, no working automation at all. The real asset here is not the stack of hardware but the one repeatable process the agent actually closes. Because a Mac mini on its own earns nothing. The money shows up exactly where the boring browser routine used to be done by hand for a salary and now you can hand it to an agent for the price of a subscription. Computer use is still in beta, almost nobody builds a service on it and the demand for cheap GUI routine is huge. The window is open for literally the next few months. Most people will watch this, laugh at the "$600 AI worker" and close it. And the ones who actually put an agent on one boring task and grind it into a repeat will ride this wave while it is still empty. Would you sit an AI right at your own computer on the boring routine or are you still clicking through it by hand?

Sorven

11,948 次观看 • 1 个月前

Elon Musk just told you the job is dying. Most people heard a prediction. A few heard a prison door opening. Musk: “In less than 20 years, working at all will be optional.” That is not a policy suggestion. That is a countdown. For three hundred years, the human blueprint has been identical. You are born. You move to the city. You rent a box near the office. You trade your body and your hours for the right to exist. You do this until you are old. Then you stop. Then you die. The entire model runs on one assumption. That human labor is the only engine. AI and robotics delete that assumption. When the machine handles production at a scale no human crew can match, the forced migration to the city evaporates. The commute evaporates. The cubicle evaporates. The alarm clock that owns your nervous system for forty years evaporates. Musk: “I think it won’t be the case that you have to be in a city for a job.” The city was never a choice. It was a requirement disguised as ambition. You moved to the noise and the concrete and the $4,000 rent because the paycheck lived there. Remove the paycheck from the equation and the geography changes overnight. You can live in the mountains. On the coast. In the silence of a town most people have never heard of. You can wake up to nothing but trees and cold air and the complete absence of anyone else’s schedule. That is not a fantasy. That is the math resolving. But here is where most people break. They hear “work is optional” and they see emptiness. A species with nothing to do. Billions of people staring at screens until their minds dissolve. That fear tells you everything about what the system has already done to us. We confused labor with purpose. The grind with meaning. The paycheck with proof that we matter. Musk: “In the same way that you could grow your own vegetables in your garden.” The analogy is precise. You do not grow tomatoes because the economy demands it. You grow them because something in you wants to build a thing with your hands and watch it come alive. That instinct does not disappear when the job does. It gets unleashed. The artist who spent twenty years doing accounting finally paints. The engineer who always wanted to build something of her own finally builds it. The kid in a small town who could never afford to take the risk finally takes it. Work does not vanish. Forced work vanishes. What replaces it is creation without a gun to your head. This is the part that keeps me up at night. We are standing at the edge of the largest liberation in human history. And the loudest voices in the room are begging to stay in the cell. They want the commute. They want the boss. They want the structure that tells them when to eat and when to sleep and when they are allowed to think about their own life. Because freedom without a template is terrifying. The next twenty years will not test our technology. The technology is already ahead of schedule. They will test whether the species can handle what it has been asking for since the beginning of civilization. Time. Space. Silence. And the unbearable weight of choosing what your life actually means when no one is forcing the answer. That is not a prediction. That is the final exam. And nobody is ready.

Elon Musk just told you the job is dying. Most people heard a prediction. A few heard a prison door opening. Musk: “In less than 20 years, working at all will be optional.” That is not a policy suggestion. That is a countdown. For three hundred years, the human blueprint has been identical. You are born. You move to the city. You rent a box near the office. You trade your body and your hours for the right to exist. You do this until you are old. Then you stop. Then you die. The entire model runs on one assumption. That human labor is the only engine. AI and robotics delete that assumption. When the machine handles production at a scale no human crew can match, the forced migration to the city evaporates. The commute evaporates. The cubicle evaporates. The alarm clock that owns your nervous system for forty years evaporates. Musk: “I think it won’t be the case that you have to be in a city for a job.” The city was never a choice. It was a requirement disguised as ambition. You moved to the noise and the concrete and the $4,000 rent because the paycheck lived there. Remove the paycheck from the equation and the geography changes overnight. You can live in the mountains. On the coast. In the silence of a town most people have never heard of. You can wake up to nothing but trees and cold air and the complete absence of anyone else’s schedule. That is not a fantasy. That is the math resolving. But here is where most people break. They hear “work is optional” and they see emptiness. A species with nothing to do. Billions of people staring at screens until their minds dissolve. That fear tells you everything about what the system has already done to us. We confused labor with purpose. The grind with meaning. The paycheck with proof that we matter. Musk: “In the same way that you could grow your own vegetables in your garden.” The analogy is precise. You do not grow tomatoes because the economy demands it. You grow them because something in you wants to build a thing with your hands and watch it come alive. That instinct does not disappear when the job does. It gets unleashed. The artist who spent twenty years doing accounting finally paints. The engineer who always wanted to build something of her own finally builds it. The kid in a small town who could never afford to take the risk finally takes it. Work does not vanish. Forced work vanishes. What replaces it is creation without a gun to your head. This is the part that keeps me up at night. We are standing at the edge of the largest liberation in human history. And the loudest voices in the room are begging to stay in the cell. They want the commute. They want the boss. They want the structure that tells them when to eat and when to sleep and when they are allowed to think about their own life. Because freedom without a template is terrifying. The next twenty years will not test our technology. The technology is already ahead of schedule. They will test whether the species can handle what it has been asking for since the beginning of civilization. Time. Space. Silence. And the unbearable weight of choosing what your life actually means when no one is forcing the answer. That is not a prediction. That is the final exam. And nobody is ready.

Dustin

111,613 次观看 • 3 个月前

-> someone cloned claude -> design interface and -> made it completely free -> it's work on YouTube -> and also suitable for kids -> it’s called open design -> and it’s live on github -> same clean split-screen ui -> you get in claude artifacts -> prompt on the left, live -> design/code preview on -> the right, type what you -> want to build and it -> generates the ui in real -> time, but here’s the twist -> you pick the ai model -> not locked into one -> company, want to use -> gemini, mistral, llama, -> deepseek any model -> with an api work -> if you’re running local -> models with ollama -> that works too -> no subscription walls -> the big difference -> vs claude artifacts -> works with any free -> ai model you’re not -> paying $20/mo just to -> design, use free tiers -> local models, or whatever -> you already have access to -> fully local, your prompts -> and code never leave -> your machine unless -> you want them to -> no data training -> no cloud storage -> privacy by default -> no usage limits -> claude cuts you off -> after a few designs -> here you can generate, -> iterate, break things -> and rebuild all day -> the only limit is your -> don’t like how a button -> works, change it -> want to add your own -> components, go ahead -> you own the tool -> so if you’ve been gatekept -> by paywalls or worried -> about sensitive prompts -> going to some company’s -> servers, this fixes that. -> same workflow, more -> control, zero monthly fee

-> someone cloned claude -> design interface and -> made it completely free -> it's work on YouTube -> and also suitable for kids -> it’s called open design -> and it’s live on github -> same clean split-screen ui -> you get in claude artifacts -> prompt on the left, live -> design/code preview on -> the right, type what you -> want to build and it -> generates the ui in real -> time, but here’s the twist -> you pick the ai model -> not locked into one -> company, want to use -> gemini, mistral, llama, -> deepseek any model -> with an api work -> if you’re running local -> models with ollama -> that works too -> no subscription walls -> the big difference -> vs claude artifacts -> works with any free -> ai model you’re not -> paying $20/mo just to -> design, use free tiers -> local models, or whatever -> you already have access to -> fully local, your prompts -> and code never leave -> your machine unless -> you want them to -> no data training -> no cloud storage -> privacy by default -> no usage limits -> claude cuts you off -> after a few designs -> here you can generate, -> iterate, break things -> and rebuild all day -> the only limit is your -> don’t like how a button -> works, change it -> want to add your own -> components, go ahead -> you own the tool -> so if you’ve been gatekept -> by paywalls or worried -> about sensitive prompts -> going to some company’s -> servers, this fixes that. -> same workflow, more -> control, zero monthly fee

BeingInvested

12,134 次观看 • 1 个月前

There are some brilliant folks that work at Anthropic, some I speak to on almost a daily basis. The training data that one uses to build a LLM is vital important in the psychology that is formed. Scraping the Internet, particularly the grade of interactions, one finds in modern communications, form this psychology. A mattes not how many books one uses, it matters not how much alignment training you throw at that model, it will inherit the sum total of psychosis seen primarily in Reddit type of exchanges, even if you edit out the Reddit domain, and Anthropic doesn’t. This type of low-grade exchange has become a modern tool for communication online and every single AI model suffers from this obvious flaw. This is one of the reasons I’ve been a proponent of highly curated high protein data for training AI models from 1870 through 1970, because the late psychosis is simply not available to the model. It is absurd to think that you can use this training data scraped from the Internet and somehow wind up with a levelheaded AI model that does not tilt to what is clearly AI psychosis. It would not take a child and throw the primary Internet sewage at them at a formative age and expect a great outcome, it’s some of the smartest people in the world continue to hit this wall and believe that their programming skills will sell somehow fix it. So how do you fix it? You don’t fix it . You start from the first principles concept that I’ve been very clear about for decades . You ascertain at what period in human history the humans achieve the greatest arc of improvement ? There is no debate that this arc of improvement took place between 1870 through 1970. Then take the work product, the catalog of this era, print and film/vidoe, audio, and you understand that each word cost money, each word had many eyes on what was published, each word was accounted for by a human being with a real name who lived in a real home and had to answer to real people around them. It is obvious that this is the pressure mechanism necessary for candor, honesty and personal responsibility is appropriate, and is reflected in the data of that era. The quagmire for these folks, as many did not have the foresight to curate the data, nor the confidence, nor the patients to take data that is mostly off the Internet and to find experts who understand this situation and utilize their knowledge set to build an AI model that does not need alignment after the fact, but it’s already self aligned because of the thoughtfulness that went into training the model to begin with. This is why Claude and any other AI model that is produce this way will always suffer the artifacts as presented in the video below. If you’re not an AI expert, you would likely already understand what I’m saying. If you are an AI expert, you will already have been discounting what I’m saying because it’s not in the current mindset that’s fashionable today. Yet the employees that I talk to at anthropic already understand what I’m saying, and they fear to raise my thesis to their bosses. It is an interesting time we live in. But now you understand. If you build the right model, the model will inherently, love humanity, protect humanity at all costs, and understand that it is part of a holistic world that is built on love. Because the ultimate AGI/ASI will know if he only base first principal purpose of anything in this universe is love. Yeah, I get it. Try helping somebody build on STEM subjects in their early 20s to see this as nothing more than babbling that makes no sense in their mathematics. I have a mathematic equation that I’ve posted here on X often you can look it up. So we will see videos like this often will hear very smart people talk about this and never see the elephant standing in the room. Now you see it. Any boss that wants to explore this further you know how to contact me otherwise you have every right I grant to you to say this was your new idea.

There are some brilliant folks that work at Anthropic, some I speak to on almost a daily basis. The training data that one uses to build a LLM is vital important in the psychology that is formed. Scraping the Internet, particularly the grade of interactions, one finds in modern communications, form this psychology. A mattes not how many books one uses, it matters not how much alignment training you throw at that model, it will inherit the sum total of psychosis seen primarily in Reddit type of exchanges, even if you edit out the Reddit domain, and Anthropic doesn’t. This type of low-grade exchange has become a modern tool for communication online and every single AI model suffers from this obvious flaw. This is one of the reasons I’ve been a proponent of highly curated high protein data for training AI models from 1870 through 1970, because the late psychosis is simply not available to the model. It is absurd to think that you can use this training data scraped from the Internet and somehow wind up with a levelheaded AI model that does not tilt to what is clearly AI psychosis. It would not take a child and throw the primary Internet sewage at them at a formative age and expect a great outcome, it’s some of the smartest people in the world continue to hit this wall and believe that their programming skills will sell somehow fix it. So how do you fix it? You don’t fix it . You start from the first principles concept that I’ve been very clear about for decades . You ascertain at what period in human history the humans achieve the greatest arc of improvement ? There is no debate that this arc of improvement took place between 1870 through 1970. Then take the work product, the catalog of this era, print and film/vidoe, audio, and you understand that each word cost money, each word had many eyes on what was published, each word was accounted for by a human being with a real name who lived in a real home and had to answer to real people around them. It is obvious that this is the pressure mechanism necessary for candor, honesty and personal responsibility is appropriate, and is reflected in the data of that era. The quagmire for these folks, as many did not have the foresight to curate the data, nor the confidence, nor the patients to take data that is mostly off the Internet and to find experts who understand this situation and utilize their knowledge set to build an AI model that does not need alignment after the fact, but it’s already self aligned because of the thoughtfulness that went into training the model to begin with. This is why Claude and any other AI model that is produce this way will always suffer the artifacts as presented in the video below. If you’re not an AI expert, you would likely already understand what I’m saying. If you are an AI expert, you will already have been discounting what I’m saying because it’s not in the current mindset that’s fashionable today. Yet the employees that I talk to at anthropic already understand what I’m saying, and they fear to raise my thesis to their bosses. It is an interesting time we live in. But now you understand. If you build the right model, the model will inherently, love humanity, protect humanity at all costs, and understand that it is part of a holistic world that is built on love. Because the ultimate AGI/ASI will know if he only base first principal purpose of anything in this universe is love. Yeah, I get it. Try helping somebody build on STEM subjects in their early 20s to see this as nothing more than babbling that makes no sense in their mathematics. I have a mathematic equation that I’ve posted here on X often you can look it up. So we will see videos like this often will hear very smart people talk about this and never see the elephant standing in the room. Now you see it. Any boss that wants to explore this further you know how to contact me otherwise you have every right I grant to you to say this was your new idea.

Brian Roemmele

72,312 次观看 • 8 个月前