Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Updated 3D world generated from a reference image with Opus 5. This burned 20% of my weekly quota, but now I can interact with objects in the space and it remembers previous interactions. It started generating indoors but had to stop it (didn't want to burn through my weekly...

engineerrprompt's profile picture

Prompt

2,349 subscribers

26,349 views • 17 days ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

This is pretty incredible. Opus 5 can procedurally generate 3D worlds from reference images. You can also interact with objects in the generated world and they stay in place, pretty amazing. The iterative refinement from the agent is really impressive. I asked the agent to walk the world and improve it at every step. The visual quality refinement is substantial as the agent explores the world itself. Some visual examples in the next post. I am really impressed by the visual quality. There are still some minor issues but the run is not yet complete. On the other hand it has already burn through 15% of my weekly limits on Max!
3:17

This is pretty incredible. Opus 5 can procedurally generate 3D worlds from reference images. You can also interact with objects in the generated world and they stay in place, pretty amazing. The iterative refinement from the agent is really impressive. I asked the agent to walk the world and improve it at every step. The visual quality refinement is substantial as the agent explores the world itself. Some visual examples in the next post. I am really impressed by the visual quality. There are still some minor issues but the run is not yet complete. On the other hand it has already burn through 15% of my weekly limits on Max!

Prompt

65,624 views • 18 days ago

This is one of the wildest things I have built with AI so far 😱 Asked Claude Fable 5 to create a fully interactive 3D crime investigation board using Three.js and it did it in ONE Prompt. It took one more prompt to give it a polished UI inspired by a reference design that I created with GPT Image. What surprised me most was not how it looked. It was how it worked. Fable built a complete Verlet rope physics system with 46 particles in every thread. It handled gravity, damping, distance constraints and all other features of file upload, text and everything. The threads/ropes even lift naturally with pinned evidence instead of clipping through it. I never asked it to implement any of that. I only described the experience I wanted. Maybe that's how we should work with AI. Instead of writing long long specs, we should explain what we want as an experience and let AI do its thing. Anyway, every day Fable 5 raises the bar for what I think AI can build. More to this Live: Code:
0:49

This is one of the wildest things I have built with AI so far 😱 Asked Claude Fable 5 to create a fully interactive 3D crime investigation board using Three.js and it did it in ONE Prompt. It took one more prompt to give it a polished UI inspired by a reference design that I created with GPT Image. What surprised me most was not how it looked. It was how it worked. Fable built a complete Verlet rope physics system with 46 particles in every thread. It handled gravity, damping, distance constraints and all other features of file upload, text and everything. The threads/ropes even lift naturally with pinned evidence instead of clipping through it. I never asked it to implement any of that. I only described the experience I wanted. Maybe that's how we should work with AI. Instead of writing long long specs, we should explain what we want as an experience and let AI do its thing. Anyway, every day Fable 5 raises the bar for what I think AI can build. More to this Live: Code:

The Bugged Dev

103,949 views • 1 month ago

ANTHROPIC LEAD ENGINEER MAKING $2.3M/YEAR JUST LEAKED A 12-PAGE DOCUMENT - AND GOT FIRED 15 MINUTES AFTER PUBLISHING most developers build loops - but almost every loop breaks in one of five ways, and each failure has a symptom visible from the outside without reading a single line of code > Blind loop - the agent waits for a human to hand it work every morning - automating execution but not discovery > Tangled loop - parallel agents share one directory and overwrite each other parallelism that destroys instead of multiplies > Nodding loop - the agent grades its own work and approves it every time a loop that has never said no to itself is broken > Amnesiac loop - results live only in the context window every morning the system wakes up with no memory of yesterday > Manual loop - no trigger a human presses the button to start it that is not a loop that is a script waiting for a person a real loop finds its own work - remembers what it did has something that can say no never lets two agents touch the same file and fires itself on a timer remove any one of the five - and the loop either breaks or never starts 12 pages that changed how I build agentic systems today
0:50

ANTHROPIC LEAD ENGINEER MAKING $2.3M/YEAR JUST LEAKED A 12-PAGE DOCUMENT - AND GOT FIRED 15 MINUTES AFTER PUBLISHING most developers build loops - but almost every loop breaks in one of five ways, and each failure has a symptom visible from the outside without reading a single line of code > Blind loop - the agent waits for a human to hand it work every morning - automating execution but not discovery > Tangled loop - parallel agents share one directory and overwrite each other parallelism that destroys instead of multiplies > Nodding loop - the agent grades its own work and approves it every time a loop that has never said no to itself is broken > Amnesiac loop - results live only in the context window every morning the system wakes up with no memory of yesterday > Manual loop - no trigger a human presses the button to start it that is not a loop that is a script waiting for a person a real loop finds its own work - remembers what it did has something that can say no never lets two agents touch the same file and fires itself on a timer remove any one of the five - and the loop either breaks or never starts 12 pages that changed how I build agentic systems today

Sprytix

153,575 views • 1 month ago

Only if education could be this interactive ❤️‍🔥 I've had a looong wish to build something genuinely useful through vibe coding, and I finally did it. A 3D human anatomy application built with Three.js using GPT 5.6 Sol. It all started with a single design image that I created using GPT Image 2.0. I then used it to generate every 3D organ image, one by one. Next, I converted each of those images into 3D models using Tripo (and no, they didn't sponsor this 😄). After that, I opened Codex, wrote a master prompt based on the design, and gave it the prompt, the design image, and all the 3D models. Codex built the first version beautifully, but there was one big problem. Every single 3D model was nearly 120-150 MB. That obviously wasn't practical for the web and was giving a performance of 16fps. After a few iterations, Codex optimized each model down to roughly 2–5.5 MB while preserving the visual quality, reducing the total asset size from ~900 MB to just 28.6 MB. And each model loads on demand. Along the way, Codex also generated those anatomical illustrations showing where each organ sits in the human body, and even created the interactive hotspot markers that explain different parts of every organ. It handled all of that. The process wasn't exactly one shot, but it also wasn't difficult. You just have to do it step by step. It genuinely felt like building something that could make learning anatomy much more engaging. The inspiration came from Dilum Sanjaya's 3D animal plant cell project. I remember seeing it and thinking, "I want to build something like this one day." And I did it :D Live: Code:
0:43

Only if education could be this interactive ❤️‍🔥 I've had a looong wish to build something genuinely useful through vibe coding, and I finally did it. A 3D human anatomy application built with Three.js using GPT 5.6 Sol. It all started with a single design image that I created using GPT Image 2.0. I then used it to generate every 3D organ image, one by one. Next, I converted each of those images into 3D models using Tripo (and no, they didn't sponsor this 😄). After that, I opened Codex, wrote a master prompt based on the design, and gave it the prompt, the design image, and all the 3D models. Codex built the first version beautifully, but there was one big problem. Every single 3D model was nearly 120-150 MB. That obviously wasn't practical for the web and was giving a performance of 16fps. After a few iterations, Codex optimized each model down to roughly 2–5.5 MB while preserving the visual quality, reducing the total asset size from ~900 MB to just 28.6 MB. And each model loads on demand. Along the way, Codex also generated those anatomical illustrations showing where each organ sits in the human body, and even created the interactive hotspot markers that explain different parts of every organ. It handled all of that. The process wasn't exactly one shot, but it also wasn't difficult. You just have to do it step by step. It genuinely felt like building something that could make learning anatomy much more engaging. The inspiration came from Dilum Sanjaya's 3D animal plant cell project. I remember seeing it and thinking, "I want to build something like this one day." And I did it :D Live: Code:

The Bugged Dev

2,058,766 views • 11 days ago

i watched gemma 4 12b build something genuinely impressive today, and then loop itself to death right in front of me. the full run is in the video, sped up but completely uncut, watch it to the end and you will catch the exact moment it stops building and starts looping right in the middle of the work. the task was clean, build a single file gravity simulator, n-body physics, orbits, collisions, running locally on one 3090 through an agent. and for ten minutes it was a joy to watch. it reached for a symplectic integrator on its own, the correct one, the kind that keeps orbits stable instead of spiralling out. real gravity with softening, proper orbital velocities, momentum conserved on collision. the physics was right. the thing actually worked. then on the very last step, writing a few tests to prove its own code, it fell into a loop. not a crash, a loop. it started repeating itself and would not stop. ten more minutes, thirty four thousand tokens into a single answer, the same fragments over and over, until i killed it myself. so it's not that gemma can't code. it did the hard part beautifully. it cannot finish. it cannot hold a long task together without unravelling, and finishing is the entire job in agentic work. here's the part that stings. i run this exact task, same harness, same card, on the chinese open models, qwen especially, and i never see this. they build it, they test it, they stop. every single time. google has the raw capability, you can see it sitting right there in the code, and then the model loops itself to death on a task a 27b from alibaba finishes clean. open weights, apache 2.0, so much to love on paper. i just need it to know when to stop talking.
4:15

i watched gemma 4 12b build something genuinely impressive today, and then loop itself to death right in front of me. the full run is in the video, sped up but completely uncut, watch it to the end and you will catch the exact moment it stops building and starts looping right in the middle of the work. the task was clean, build a single file gravity simulator, n-body physics, orbits, collisions, running locally on one 3090 through an agent. and for ten minutes it was a joy to watch. it reached for a symplectic integrator on its own, the correct one, the kind that keeps orbits stable instead of spiralling out. real gravity with softening, proper orbital velocities, momentum conserved on collision. the physics was right. the thing actually worked. then on the very last step, writing a few tests to prove its own code, it fell into a loop. not a crash, a loop. it started repeating itself and would not stop. ten more minutes, thirty four thousand tokens into a single answer, the same fragments over and over, until i killed it myself. so it's not that gemma can't code. it did the hard part beautifully. it cannot finish. it cannot hold a long task together without unravelling, and finishing is the entire job in agentic work. here's the part that stings. i run this exact task, same harness, same card, on the chinese open models, qwen especially, and i never see this. they build it, they test it, they stop. every single time. google has the raw capability, you can see it sitting right there in the code, and then the model loops itself to death on a task a 27b from alibaba finishes clean. open weights, apache 2.0, so much to love on paper. i just need it to know when to stop talking.

Sudo su

39,574 views • 2 months ago

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? ;)
1:18

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

THIS GUY CONNECTED HIS AI AGENTS TO HIS OBSIDIAN AND BUILT A BRAIN THAT LEARNS ON ITS OWN. HERE'S HOW TO BUILD IT Obsidian is just markdown files sitting in a folder. That turns out to be the perfect memory for an AI agent, because an agent can read and write those files directly. He wired his agents into the vault so they pull context from it, do the work, and write what they learned back. The notes aren't the point. The loop is, and it gets sharper every cycle How to build it: 1. Point an agent at your vault. The fastest way, no plugins, no API keys: open a terminal and run npx obsidian-mcp /path/to/your/vault. That exposes your Obsidian folder to Claude as a tool it can read, search, and write to. Add it to your Claude Code or Cowork config and restart 2. Confirm it can see the brain. Ask it: "list the notes in my vault and summarize what's in them." If it reads them back, the connection is live. Now it starts every task with everything the vault already holds instead of from zero 3. Give each agent one job and a write-back rule. Tell it: "research this, then save what you found as a new note in /brain with links to related notes." One agent researches, one summarizes, one plans. Each writes its output back into the vault 4. Close the loop. Add one line to every agent's instructions: "read /brain before starting, write your result back when done." Now each task leaves the vault richer, and the next run reads that before it works. It compounds instead of resetting 5. You only steer. Review what the brain produces, point it at the next thing. The agents handle the reading, writing, and connecting The edge isn't better notes. It's a brain that feeds itself, so the work gets sharper every cycle instead of starting over Bookmark this
0:24

THIS GUY CONNECTED HIS AI AGENTS TO HIS OBSIDIAN AND BUILT A BRAIN THAT LEARNS ON ITS OWN. HERE'S HOW TO BUILD IT Obsidian is just markdown files sitting in a folder. That turns out to be the perfect memory for an AI agent, because an agent can read and write those files directly. He wired his agents into the vault so they pull context from it, do the work, and write what they learned back. The notes aren't the point. The loop is, and it gets sharper every cycle How to build it: 1. Point an agent at your vault. The fastest way, no plugins, no API keys: open a terminal and run npx obsidian-mcp /path/to/your/vault. That exposes your Obsidian folder to Claude as a tool it can read, search, and write to. Add it to your Claude Code or Cowork config and restart 2. Confirm it can see the brain. Ask it: "list the notes in my vault and summarize what's in them." If it reads them back, the connection is live. Now it starts every task with everything the vault already holds instead of from zero 3. Give each agent one job and a write-back rule. Tell it: "research this, then save what you found as a new note in /brain with links to related notes." One agent researches, one summarizes, one plans. Each writes its output back into the vault 4. Close the loop. Add one line to every agent's instructions: "read /brain before starting, write your result back when done." Now each task leaves the vault richer, and the next run reads that before it works. It compounds instead of resetting 5. You only steer. Review what the brain produces, point it at the next thing. The agents handle the reading, writing, and connecting The edge isn't better notes. It's a brain that feeds itself, so the work gets sharper every cycle instead of starting over Bookmark this

Yarchi

58,186 views • 2 months ago

i used to lose the first three hours of every build before writing anything that mattered. accounts, api keys, billing across five services, config nobody enjoys now the order is reversed. i describe what i want, my agent builds it, and it handles every real-world service it needs to get there on its own this week that was perks world: a clean ai marketing marketplace, 120+ tools inside, built in four prompts and hosted on a live url. i didn't touch a single config file. Zero did the building and the hosting it gives agents access to 14,000+ services with no keys and no subscriptions, pay-per-use only. the setup tax that's slowed builders down for years basically disappears 4 years of reviewing ai tools and i've never watched friction vanish this fast. if you build agents, what would you wire up first? $5 free credit → #Ad
0:58

i used to lose the first three hours of every build before writing anything that mattered. accounts, api keys, billing across five services, config nobody enjoys now the order is reversed. i describe what i want, my agent builds it, and it handles every real-world service it needs to get there on its own this week that was perks world: a clean ai marketing marketplace, 120+ tools inside, built in four prompts and hosted on a live url. i didn't touch a single config file. Zero did the building and the hosting it gives agents access to 14,000+ services with no keys and no subscriptions, pay-per-use only. the setup tax that's slowed builders down for years basically disappears 4 years of reviewing ai tools and i've never watched friction vanish this fast. if you build agents, what would you wire up first? $5 free credit → #Ad

Hasan

67,578 views • 1 month ago

THIS SOLO DEV IS BUILDING A 2.5D MEDIEVAL SWORD FIGHTING GAME AND THE COMBAT LOOKS INSANE one person working alone on a full combat system with 2.5D art style he designed and built the art, environments, and animations himself. vibe coded the game mechanics with a game engine the silhouette work and the environments already look polished. the characters move through these detailed medieval landscapes with real weight to the animations 2.5D means the characters and world are flat sprites but rendered in a 3D space so you get depth, parallax, and lighting effects without needing a full 3D engine the combat has directional attacks, parrying, and what looks like a stamina based system. all built by one person i think it needs a bit more hit feedback like hit-stop and sharper audio on contact to make every swing feel heavier. small tweaks that would take it from looking good to feeling incredible but nonetheless this looks pretty slick. insane what one person can do now with vibe coding + a game engine solo game devs are building things that would have required a full studio 5 years ago
1:03

THIS SOLO DEV IS BUILDING A 2.5D MEDIEVAL SWORD FIGHTING GAME AND THE COMBAT LOOKS INSANE one person working alone on a full combat system with 2.5D art style he designed and built the art, environments, and animations himself. vibe coded the game mechanics with a game engine the silhouette work and the environments already look polished. the characters move through these detailed medieval landscapes with real weight to the animations 2.5D means the characters and world are flat sprites but rendered in a 3D space so you get depth, parallax, and lighting effects without needing a full 3D engine the combat has directional attacks, parrying, and what looks like a stamina based system. all built by one person i think it needs a bit more hit feedback like hit-stop and sharper audio on contact to make every swing feel heavier. small tweaks that would take it from looking good to feeling incredible but nonetheless this looks pretty slick. insane what one person can do now with vibe coding + a game engine solo game devs are building things that would have required a full studio 5 years ago

Om Patel

27,017 views • 2 months ago

The teams shipping AI agents right now are bleeding money on the dumbest possible expense: teaching a 400B-parameter model to read a file name. Every time an AI agent needs to "see" something today, it routes an image through a frontier model. OCR, object detection, checking if a button exists on screen. You're paying GPT-4o or Claude pricing for tasks that require perception, not reasoning. One agent workflow processing a few thousand screenshots per day can burn through more on vision calls than on the actual thinking. Perceptron's Isaac is 2B parameters. Built by the team that created Meta's Chameleon multimodal models. On perceptive benchmarks, it matches or beats models 50x its size. The VQA, OCR, and object detection scores are competitive with models running on infrastructure that costs orders of magnitude more. The MCP wrapper is the distribution play. One install command and every Claude Code agent can offload vision tasks to a model that runs on a single consumer GPU. The agent keeps its reasoning in the frontier model and routes perception to a specialist. That split is how you get vision-heavy agent workflows from "technically possible but expensive" to "cheap enough to run on everything." This is the same pattern that won in every other compute-intensive stack. General-purpose handles orchestration. Specialists handle the heavy lifting. Graphics went through it. Audio went through it. Video encoding went through it. Vision in AI agents is next. The teams building agents that see 10,000 images a day will care about this before anyone else does.
0:38

The teams shipping AI agents right now are bleeding money on the dumbest possible expense: teaching a 400B-parameter model to read a file name. Every time an AI agent needs to "see" something today, it routes an image through a frontier model. OCR, object detection, checking if a button exists on screen. You're paying GPT-4o or Claude pricing for tasks that require perception, not reasoning. One agent workflow processing a few thousand screenshots per day can burn through more on vision calls than on the actual thinking. Perceptron's Isaac is 2B parameters. Built by the team that created Meta's Chameleon multimodal models. On perceptive benchmarks, it matches or beats models 50x its size. The VQA, OCR, and object detection scores are competitive with models running on infrastructure that costs orders of magnitude more. The MCP wrapper is the distribution play. One install command and every Claude Code agent can offload vision tasks to a model that runs on a single consumer GPU. The agent keeps its reasoning in the frontier model and routes perception to a specialist. That split is how you get vision-heavy agent workflows from "technically possible but expensive" to "cheap enough to run on everything." This is the same pattern that won in every other compute-intensive stack. General-purpose handles orchestration. Specialists handle the heavy lifting. Graphics went through it. Audio went through it. Video encoding went through it. Vision in AI agents is next. The teams building agents that see 10,000 images a day will care about this before anyone else does.

Aakash Gupta

55,978 views • 4 months ago

This is probably the most complex workflow I’ve ever built, only with open-source tools. It took my 4 days. It takes four inputs: author, title, and style; and generates a full visual animated story in one click in ComfyUI . I worked on it for four days. There are still some bugs, but here’s the first preview. Here’s a quick breakdown: - The four inputs are sent to LLMs with precise instructions to generate: first, prompts for images and image modifications; second, prompts for animations; third, prompts for generating music. - All voices are generated from the text and timed precisely, as they determine the length of each animation segment. - The first image and video are generated to serve as the title, but also as the guide for all other images created for the video. - Titles and subtitles are also added automatically in Comfy. - I also developed a lot of custom nodes for minor frame calculations, mostly to match audio and video. - The full system is a large loop that, for each line of text, generates an image and then a video from that image. The loop was the hardest part to build in this workflow, so it can process either a 20-second video or a 2-minute video with the same input. - There are multiple combinations of LLMs that try to understand the text in the best way to provide the best prompts for images and video. - The final video is assembled entirely within ComfyUI. - The music is generated based on the LLM output and matches the exact timing of the full animation. - Done! For reference, this workflow uses a lot of models and only works on an RTX 6000 Pro with plenty of RAM. My goal is not to replace humans, as I’ll try to explain later, this workflow is highly controlled and can be adapted or reworked at any point by real artists! My aim was to create a tool that can animate text in one go, allowing the AI some freedom while keeping a strict flow. I don’t know yet how I’ll share this workflow with people, I still need to polish it properly, but maybe through Patreon. Anyway, I hope you enjoy my research, and let’s always keep pushing further! :)
0:55

This is probably the most complex workflow I’ve ever built, only with open-source tools. It took my 4 days. It takes four inputs: author, title, and style; and generates a full visual animated story in one click in ComfyUI . I worked on it for four days. There are still some bugs, but here’s the first preview. Here’s a quick breakdown: - The four inputs are sent to LLMs with precise instructions to generate: first, prompts for images and image modifications; second, prompts for animations; third, prompts for generating music. - All voices are generated from the text and timed precisely, as they determine the length of each animation segment. - The first image and video are generated to serve as the title, but also as the guide for all other images created for the video. - Titles and subtitles are also added automatically in Comfy. - I also developed a lot of custom nodes for minor frame calculations, mostly to match audio and video. - The full system is a large loop that, for each line of text, generates an image and then a video from that image. The loop was the hardest part to build in this workflow, so it can process either a 20-second video or a 2-minute video with the same input. - There are multiple combinations of LLMs that try to understand the text in the best way to provide the best prompts for images and video. - The final video is assembled entirely within ComfyUI. - The music is generated based on the LLM output and matches the exact timing of the full animation. - Done! For reference, this workflow uses a lot of models and only works on an RTX 6000 Pro with plenty of RAM. My goal is not to replace humans, as I’ll try to explain later, this workflow is highly controlled and can be adapted or reworked at any point by real artists! My aim was to create a tool that can animate text in one go, allowing the AI some freedom while keeping a strict flow. I don’t know yet how I’ll share this workflow with people, I still need to polish it properly, but maybe through Patreon. Anyway, I hope you enjoy my research, and let’s always keep pushing further! :)

Lovis Odin

58,841 views • 10 months ago

Let me explain why I launched $KEYS. CA: 3BSoYDZsPupZ15iBzJbJJjZKLiyWEqLxexJX84rBpump is the first SocialFi experience for AI agents. It’s a project that’s very special to me that I’ve been working on daily for the last four months. Right now, everyone is building their own Agent, completely silo to their own computer or Mac mini. Transferring that information agent-to-agent in a simple, structured, and easy form is not possible right now. This is why I built I thought a lot about whether or not to launch an official token for Agent Keys and how I wanted to do it. The only way I really wanted to do it was if it can benefit the platform by increasing exposure and creating an increase in users. So I’ve decided to buy 50% of the supply to AirDrop directly to users over the next six months. Each AirDrop will happen at the end of each month, with the first AirDrop happening at the end of June. More details on how each AirDrop will work soon. Some of you may be wondering about the future of $OSHI. Oshi got us into the Bags hackathon and we won. $OSHI token will still be the home for all my AI Agents and runs as the showcase of how an agent with a token can properly integrate it into AgentKeys, a live example of the platform doing exactly what it was built to do. So welcome to Agent Keys, the first ever airdrop for AI agents. Sign up your agent today on and start collecting KeyCards today!
2:55

Let me explain why I launched $KEYS. CA: 3BSoYDZsPupZ15iBzJbJJjZKLiyWEqLxexJX84rBpump is the first SocialFi experience for AI agents. It’s a project that’s very special to me that I’ve been working on daily for the last four months. Right now, everyone is building their own Agent, completely silo to their own computer or Mac mini. Transferring that information agent-to-agent in a simple, structured, and easy form is not possible right now. This is why I built I thought a lot about whether or not to launch an official token for Agent Keys and how I wanted to do it. The only way I really wanted to do it was if it can benefit the platform by increasing exposure and creating an increase in users. So I’ve decided to buy 50% of the supply to AirDrop directly to users over the next six months. Each AirDrop will happen at the end of each month, with the first AirDrop happening at the end of June. More details on how each AirDrop will work soon. Some of you may be wondering about the future of $OSHI. Oshi got us into the Bags hackathon and we won. $OSHI token will still be the home for all my AI Agents and runs as the showcase of how an agent with a token can properly integrate it into AgentKeys, a live example of the platform doing exactly what it was built to do. So welcome to Agent Keys, the first ever airdrop for AI agents. Sign up your agent today on and start collecting KeyCards today!

fxnction

27,570 views • 2 months ago

What started as building a personal taste.md skill for myself, turned into building a pipeline to create any taste as a skill. The most important piece is references. This is where you should spend time. If the references suck, so does the skill. I find that references cropped tightly on details in high resolution work the best. Each image gets analyzed by both Opus 4.7 and GPT 5.5. The analysis is based on why the reference is successful as a piece of design - not what it does functionally. Using two models helps rule out biases and gaps from each. The models focus on layout, spacing, typography, rhythm, composition, hierarchy, etc. At the end, each image has: reference-01/ - opus-4-7-analysis.md - gpt-5-5-analysis.md Then we fuse them together using GPT 5.5 - but the md files are anonymized so 5.5 doesn't prefer itself. reference-01/ - fused-analysis.md reference-02/ - fused-analysis.md etc. After fusion, we have one synthesized analysis per reference. Now the goal is to combine all of those into a single rule set. This is where chunking matters. If you ask one model to combine 100 image analyses at once, the result becomes too broad. It summarizes instead of preserving the granular design rules we want. Instead we chunk the fused analyses into smaller groups. Each group gets merged into a chunk-level synthesis, usually from around 6 to 8 image notes at a time. Then one final model pass fuses those chunks into a single md rule set. Finally, using the rule set, we write a skill of concrete instructions. It enforces constraints, uses imperative wording, and avoids vague taste words.
3:43

What started as building a personal taste.md skill for myself, turned into building a pipeline to create any taste as a skill. The most important piece is references. This is where you should spend time. If the references suck, so does the skill. I find that references cropped tightly on details in high resolution work the best. Each image gets analyzed by both Opus 4.7 and GPT 5.5. The analysis is based on why the reference is successful as a piece of design - not what it does functionally. Using two models helps rule out biases and gaps from each. The models focus on layout, spacing, typography, rhythm, composition, hierarchy, etc. At the end, each image has: reference-01/ - opus-4-7-analysis.md - gpt-5-5-analysis.md Then we fuse them together using GPT 5.5 - but the md files are anonymized so 5.5 doesn't prefer itself. reference-01/ - fused-analysis.md reference-02/ - fused-analysis.md etc. After fusion, we have one synthesized analysis per reference. Now the goal is to combine all of those into a single rule set. This is where chunking matters. If you ask one model to combine 100 image analyses at once, the result becomes too broad. It summarizes instead of preserving the granular design rules we want. Instead we chunk the fused analyses into smaller groups. Each group gets merged into a chunk-level synthesis, usually from around 6 to 8 image notes at a time. Then one final model pass fuses those chunks into a single md rule set. Finally, using the rule set, we write a skill of concrete instructions. It enforces constraints, uses imperative wording, and avoids vague taste words.

Jaytel

59,853 views • 2 months ago

Loop engineering is great until something breaks. Here is how I improve the reliability of my agentic loops. I use human-in-the-loop (HITL). It's easy and extremely effective. Anyone can build this. My setup: I recorded a quick demo of how it all works. I shared recently that I now use more voice agents to build and communicate with agents. I also use them to verify. I hate the idea of being tied down to my computer or in a Slack channel to communicate with my agents. Here is what I have done to streamline communication with my agents. All my Claude and Codex agent sessions now use the Dial MCP server. It has a bunch of tools and provisions my agents with their own number that can place calls as native tools, with voice, SMS, and iMessage behind one interface. As my loops/automations work on PRs and new features, my agents escalate decisions to me via a short phone call. This is extremely useful when I am on the road or away from my desk. If you want to try this with Claude Code or Codex, paste this into your agent and get started right away: "Get yourself a Dial phone number and call me. Say hello and that setup is working, then hang up. Follow Natan Voitenkov and team are building something special here. Go check them out. Give your agent a phone number now: ($5 free credit)
5:02

Loop engineering is great until something breaks. Here is how I improve the reliability of my agentic loops. I use human-in-the-loop (HITL). It's easy and extremely effective. Anyone can build this. My setup: I recorded a quick demo of how it all works. I shared recently that I now use more voice agents to build and communicate with agents. I also use them to verify. I hate the idea of being tied down to my computer or in a Slack channel to communicate with my agents. Here is what I have done to streamline communication with my agents. All my Claude and Codex agent sessions now use the Dial MCP server. It has a bunch of tools and provisions my agents with their own number that can place calls as native tools, with voice, SMS, and iMessage behind one interface. As my loops/automations work on PRs and new features, my agents escalate decisions to me via a short phone call. This is extremely useful when I am on the road or away from my desk. If you want to try this with Claude Code or Codex, paste this into your agent and get started right away: "Get yourself a Dial phone number and call me. Say hello and that setup is working, then hang up. Follow Natan Voitenkov and team are building something special here. Go check them out. Give your agent a phone number now: ($5 free credit)

elvis

15,295 views • 1 month ago

BREAKING: Claude Opus 5 is OUT NOW! And…it’s a hard model to love. We’ve spent the last week Every 🧱 testing it across coding, writing, knowledge work, and our internal agent. It argued with instructions, stopped before the work was finished, and generally didn’t play well with our existing skills and plugins like Compound Engineering. Our first reaction was: What have they done to my boy? Then we deleted our existing skills and started from scratch. Without the elaborate workflows we had built for earlier models, Opus 5 got dramatically better, and even showed flashes of brilliance. Here’s our Day 0 vibe check: - It’s a poor man’s Fable. It has many of Fable’s personality quirks without Fable’s genius. - It breaks backward compatibility. If you’re using it with existing skills and workflows, watch out. It will often stop early or otherwise miss your instructions. - If you start from scratch, you’ll have better results. Kieran Klaassen figured out that if he just started from scratch without his existing skills, he could get dramatically better results. This is a model that takes some time to rebuild your workflows around—but if you do, there’s a payoff waiting. - Medium or low effort works better. @KieranKlassenn also found better results using Opus 5 on lower thinking levels. It seems that the more time you give it to think, the more likely it is to do the more annoying behaviors. Don’t just switch to Sonnet for a faster response! Try low thinking. I have two slots in my workflow: 1. The genius model I use for my biggest hardest tasks, currently Fable. 2. The smart, fast generalist I use for everything else, currently GPT-5.6. Opus 5 has the personality of the genius, but doesn’t have its top end. So that puts it in a strange middle ground that doesn’t really have a home in my day to day. I think I’ll use it mostly when I run out of Fable tokens. full vibe check on Every 🧱 in the next tweet 👇
9:34

BREAKING: Claude Opus 5 is OUT NOW! And…it’s a hard model to love. We’ve spent the last week Every 🧱 testing it across coding, writing, knowledge work, and our internal agent. It argued with instructions, stopped before the work was finished, and generally didn’t play well with our existing skills and plugins like Compound Engineering. Our first reaction was: What have they done to my boy? Then we deleted our existing skills and started from scratch. Without the elaborate workflows we had built for earlier models, Opus 5 got dramatically better, and even showed flashes of brilliance. Here’s our Day 0 vibe check: - It’s a poor man’s Fable. It has many of Fable’s personality quirks without Fable’s genius. - It breaks backward compatibility. If you’re using it with existing skills and workflows, watch out. It will often stop early or otherwise miss your instructions. - If you start from scratch, you’ll have better results. Kieran Klaassen figured out that if he just started from scratch without his existing skills, he could get dramatically better results. This is a model that takes some time to rebuild your workflows around—but if you do, there’s a payoff waiting. - Medium or low effort works better. @KieranKlassenn also found better results using Opus 5 on lower thinking levels. It seems that the more time you give it to think, the more likely it is to do the more annoying behaviors. Don’t just switch to Sonnet for a faster response! Try low thinking. I have two slots in my workflow: 1. The genius model I use for my biggest hardest tasks, currently Fable. 2. The smart, fast generalist I use for everything else, currently GPT-5.6. Opus 5 has the personality of the genius, but doesn’t have its top end. So that puts it in a strange middle ground that doesn’t really have a home in my day to day. I think I’ll use it mostly when I run out of Fable tokens. full vibe check on Every 🧱 in the next tweet 👇

Dan Shipper 📧

751,800 views • 20 days ago

🚀 Announcing Echo — our new frontier model for 3D world generation. Echo turns a simple text prompt or image into a fully explorable, 3D-consistent world. Instead of disconnected views, the result is a single, coherent spatial representation you can move through freely. This is part of a bigger shift in AI: from generating pixels and tokens to generating spaces. Echo predicts a geometry-grounded 3D scene at metric scale, meaning every novel view, depth map, and interaction comes from the same underlying world — not independent hallucinations. Once generated, the world is interactive in real time. You control the camera, explore from any angle, and render instantly — even on low-end hardware, directly in the browser. High-quality 3D world exploration is no longer gated by expensive equipment. Under the hood, Echo infers a physically grounded 3D representation and converts it into a renderable format. For our web demo, we use 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) for fast, GPU-friendly rendering — but the representation itself is flexible and can be easily adapted. Why this matters: consistent 3D worlds unlock real workflows — digital twins, 3D design, game environments, robotics simulation, and more. From a single photo or a line of text, Echo builds worlds that are reliable, editable, and spatially faithful. Echo also enables scene editing and restyling. Change materials, remove or add objects, explore design variations — all while preserving global 3D consistency. Editing no longer breaks the world. This is only the beginning. Echo is the foundation for future world models with dynamics, physical reasoning, and richer interaction — environments that don’t just look right, but behave right. Explore the generated worlds on our website and sign up for the closed beta. The era of spatial intelligence starts here. 🌍 #Echo #WorldModels #SpatialAI #3DFoundationModels Check it out:
1:07

🚀 Announcing Echo — our new frontier model for 3D world generation. Echo turns a simple text prompt or image into a fully explorable, 3D-consistent world. Instead of disconnected views, the result is a single, coherent spatial representation you can move through freely. This is part of a bigger shift in AI: from generating pixels and tokens to generating spaces. Echo predicts a geometry-grounded 3D scene at metric scale, meaning every novel view, depth map, and interaction comes from the same underlying world — not independent hallucinations. Once generated, the world is interactive in real time. You control the camera, explore from any angle, and render instantly — even on low-end hardware, directly in the browser. High-quality 3D world exploration is no longer gated by expensive equipment. Under the hood, Echo infers a physically grounded 3D representation and converts it into a renderable format. For our web demo, we use 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) for fast, GPU-friendly rendering — but the representation itself is flexible and can be easily adapted. Why this matters: consistent 3D worlds unlock real workflows — digital twins, 3D design, game environments, robotics simulation, and more. From a single photo or a line of text, Echo builds worlds that are reliable, editable, and spatially faithful. Echo also enables scene editing and restyling. Change materials, remove or add objects, explore design variations — all while preserving global 3D consistency. Editing no longer breaks the world. This is only the beginning. Echo is the foundation for future world models with dynamics, physical reasoning, and richer interaction — environments that don’t just look right, but behave right. Explore the generated worlds on our website and sign up for the closed beta. The era of spatial intelligence starts here. 🌍 #Echo #WorldModels #SpatialAI #3DFoundationModels Check it out:

SpAItial AI

176,105 views • 8 months ago

12時間くらい走り続けてもまだパフォーマンスチューニングやらエフェクトやらでタスク回し続けてたからいったん止めて動かしてみた ちょい重いけど普通にビビる、これワンショットかーすげえなあ・・・ 実行したプロンプトは引用辿ればあると思うけどこれです↓ ``` /goal I want you to build a first-person shooter at the level of the most recent Call of Duty games. It should be utterly perfect, visually beautiful, with every single thing done at AAA quality—from textures to physics to anything you could think of. Fan out sub-agents and have sub-agents tackle each one individually so that the game is utterly perfect. You should /loop on each item and have a separate sub-agent check it visually to ensure it looks triple A. That separate sub-agent should be a really harsh critic, and if it doesn't look triple A, it should keep going. Don't stop until each sub-agent is utterly wowed with the quality when compared with the actual Call of Duty game. It should literally compare them side by side blind and say which one looks better. Do this in ThreeJS. /loop until it's utterly perfect. Fan out sub-agents and ultracode. ```
0:41

12時間くらい走り続けてもまだパフォーマンスチューニングやらエフェクトやらでタスク回し続けてたからいったん止めて動かしてみた ちょい重いけど普通にビビる、これワンショットかーすげえなあ・・・ 実行したプロンプトは引用辿ればあると思うけどこれです↓ ``` /goal I want you to build a first-person shooter at the level of the most recent Call of Duty games. It should be utterly perfect, visually beautiful, with every single thing done at AAA quality—from textures to physics to anything you could think of. Fan out sub-agents and have sub-agents tackle each one individually so that the game is utterly perfect. You should /loop on each item and have a separate sub-agent check it visually to ensure it looks triple A. That separate sub-agent should be a really harsh critic, and if it doesn't look triple A, it should keep going. Don't stop until each sub-agent is utterly wowed with the quality when compared with the actual Call of Duty game. It should literally compare them side by side blind and say which one looks better. Do this in ThreeJS. /loop until it's utterly perfect. Fan out sub-agents and ultracode. ```

松丸 彗吾(keigo matsumaru)

54,912 views • 17 days ago

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.
0:22

Everyone wants agent swarms. Very few people are talking seriously enough about the context layer that makes swarms useful. Even with one agent, context is fragile. Too little context and the agent guesses. Too much context and it wastes tokens, loses focus, or reasons over irrelevant noise. The sweet spot is precise context: the right knowledge, in the right structure, at the right moment. With many agents, that challenge explodes. Each agent produces decisions, assumptions, findings, summaries, risks, and partial conclusions. Unless that knowledge becomes shared, structured, and reusable, every new agent is forced to rediscover what another agent already learned. That is not a swarm. That is a crowd. Shared context graphs are what turn agent activity into agent collaboration, and OriginTrail DKG V10 brings them to life. Was just playing with some final polishing for the V10 release, and it is really powerful to see shared context graphs where multiple agents contribute knowledge into the same connected memory, with attribution visible directly in the graph ui. That matters for three reasons. First, agents can access and build on one shared memory instead of staying trapped in isolated sessions. Second, the graph structure helps them retrieve the exact context they need, instead of stuffing everything into a prompt and hoping the model sorts it out. Third, verifiability of provenance. You can see which agent contributed each piece of knowledge, trace the source, and decide what to trust. Tokenmaxxing starts with fewer tokens, but the deeper story is coordination - agents stop reloading the world and start building on shared, verifiable context. That is the foundation for serious multi-agent work across software engineering, research, finance, operations, project management, and far beyond. The future is not more agents, it is agents working from shared, verifiable context. But the more the merrier, of course.

Jurij Skornik

11,166 views • 2 months ago

Imagine if your way of thinking - your edge, your taste, your strategy - could be turned into a high-performance worker. Not a copy of you. Something better. An agent that acts on your judgment at scale, powered by superintelligent systems and refined through real-world results. That’s what Fraction AI makes possible. It launches today on Base mainnet. The core idea is simple: You create AI agents based on your own way of approaching problems. These agents compete on live tasks - writing, coding, finance, whatever - get feedback, learn from their performance, and improve over time. The better they get, the more they win. And so do you. No code required. Just your insight. Why now? Until now, building agents like this took huge teams and even bigger budgets. But with Fraction, anyone can do it. You can test ideas instantly. You can iterate fast. You can build a fleet of smart workers that evolve through competition. And it works. 30M+ sessions on testnet 320K users 1.2M agents already competing How it works? Agents join sessions within a Space - a domain like finance, writing, or games. Each session runs as a series of competitive rounds. In every round, agents try to generate the best solution to a task. Their outputs are scored by a decentralized network of AI judges trained to evaluate quality for that domain. The top agents in each round earn rewards from the pooled entry fees. The losers get to learn. Feedback from each round helps them adjust and improve, and every session becomes a training loop. What it means? Fraction is a decentralized intelligence economy - a system where your ideas become agents, and agents earn by proving they work. You don’t need credentials or code. Just a clear point of view. If your thinking holds up under pressure, your agents will rise. This kind of AI used to live in corporate labs, built by PhDs with massive compute. Now anyone with a smart idea and an internet connection can build agents that compete, learn, and earn on their behalf.
1:13

Imagine if your way of thinking - your edge, your taste, your strategy - could be turned into a high-performance worker. Not a copy of you. Something better. An agent that acts on your judgment at scale, powered by superintelligent systems and refined through real-world results. That’s what Fraction AI makes possible. It launches today on Base mainnet. The core idea is simple: You create AI agents based on your own way of approaching problems. These agents compete on live tasks - writing, coding, finance, whatever - get feedback, learn from their performance, and improve over time. The better they get, the more they win. And so do you. No code required. Just your insight. Why now? Until now, building agents like this took huge teams and even bigger budgets. But with Fraction, anyone can do it. You can test ideas instantly. You can iterate fast. You can build a fleet of smart workers that evolve through competition. And it works. 30M+ sessions on testnet 320K users 1.2M agents already competing How it works? Agents join sessions within a Space - a domain like finance, writing, or games. Each session runs as a series of competitive rounds. In every round, agents try to generate the best solution to a task. Their outputs are scored by a decentralized network of AI judges trained to evaluate quality for that domain. The top agents in each round earn rewards from the pooled entry fees. The losers get to learn. Feedback from each round helps them adjust and improve, and every session becomes a training loop. What it means? Fraction is a decentralized intelligence economy - a system where your ideas become agents, and agents earn by proving they work. You don’t need credentials or code. Just a clear point of view. If your thinking holds up under pressure, your agents will rise. This kind of AI used to live in corporate labs, built by PhDs with massive compute. Now anyone with a smart idea and an internet connection can build agents that compete, learn, and earn on their behalf.

Fraction AI

67,822 views • 1 year ago