3 ms·

I've never seen model providers marketing like that. What examples have you seen?

Lalabadie 1mo ago
I don't really think they advertise "Create your app idea in one weekend night" and assume the general public will mentally add "... but hire an experienced developer to supervise the process".
0x457 1mo ago
Literally any coding agent marking material: - https://cognition.com/ https://cognition.com/ - https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ - https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-3-7-sonnet https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-3-7-sonnet anthropic specifically brags about how good claude code is every annoucement of a new model. I will surrender that none of them claim its "to perfection", but IMO its implied because no one would claim that their model one-shots any issue to dog shit quality.
- hombre_fatal 1mo ago
  Seems like motte and bailey fallacy. They say their models are good (the motte), therefore their models must one-shot everything to perfection (the bailey). Besides, other people's claims about something doesn't give you license to abandon all critical thinking. Though it's evident they don't claim what you say they are.
  - 0x457 1mo ago
    That's irrelevant. Questions was why people assume somthing, and answer is because that's how it advertised. To be clear that's not what I'm thinking, even Fable 5 produces some hilariously bad results under some conditions and sonnet 5 produced great results under others.
    - hombre_fatal 1mo ago
      > because that's how it advertised. But you didn't provide the evidence for that. You shared some links and then admitted they didn't claim it. It kinda seems like "because I think they're a little too positive about their product, I can set my expectations to anything I want and la-la-la it's their fault." And I don't see the problem with agents building test scaffolding as they go. It might be too defensive at times, like testing a shell script you don't run often, but big deal. It's kinda cool imo, and it's trivial to make it stop.
- infinite_spin 1mo ago
  - https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ no where does this document suggest that codex can "one shot everything to perfection with just a prompt". It describes using a prompt plus agent skills (which are essentially many other prompts) to develop a playable game.. nothing about it being perfect or anything more than being in a playable state.
  - joshribakoff 1mo ago
    Oh please, you sound so disingenuous, the claim wasn’t that the documents contained a specific phrase. You’re moving the goal posts. Their name is literally a play on anthropomorphising the models, such as… the ceo going on tv shows and repeatedly saying the models may be conscious and they may start nuclear wars, etc.
    - infinite_spin 1mo ago
      I'm content with my response.
mrheosuper 1mo ago
I've seen a lot of cursor app, about some PO that has an idea for an app in the morning, then asking her agent to make it when her commuting, when arrive at office the app is done
onion2k 1mo ago
Claude has a /goal function that explicitly says it'll carry on working until it's done what you prompted it to do. That's exactly what a 'AI will zero-shot anything' believer is looking for. Behind the scenes it's really multi-shotting with generated prompts, but the user won't care.

I don't really think they advertise "Create your app idea in one weekend night" and assume the general public will mentally add "... but hire an experienced developer to supervise the process".

0x457 1mo ago

Literally any coding agent marking material: - https://cognition.com/ https://cognition.com/ - https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ - https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-3-7-sonnet https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-3-7-sonnet anthropic specifically brags about how good claude code is every annoucement of a new model. I will surrender that none of them claim its "to perfection", but IMO its implied because no one would claim that their model one-shots any issue to dog shit quality.

hombre_fatal 1mo ago
Seems like motte and bailey fallacy. They say their models are good (the motte), therefore their models must one-shot everything to perfection (the bailey). Besides, other people's claims about something doesn't give you license to abandon all critical thinking. Though it's evident they don't claim what you say they are.
- 0x457 1mo ago
  That's irrelevant. Questions was why people assume somthing, and answer is because that's how it advertised. To be clear that's not what I'm thinking, even Fable 5 produces some hilariously bad results under some conditions and sonnet 5 produced great results under others.
  - hombre_fatal 1mo ago
    > because that's how it advertised. But you didn't provide the evidence for that. You shared some links and then admitted they didn't claim it. It kinda seems like "because I think they're a little too positive about their product, I can set my expectations to anything I want and la-la-la it's their fault." And I don't see the problem with agents building test scaffolding as they go. It might be too defensive at times, like testing a shell script you don't run often, but big deal. It's kinda cool imo, and it's trivial to make it stop.
infinite_spin 1mo ago
- https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ https://openai.com/index/introducing-the-codex-app/ no where does this document suggest that codex can "one shot everything to perfection with just a prompt". It describes using a prompt plus agent skills (which are essentially many other prompts) to develop a playable game.. nothing about it being perfect or anything more than being in a playable state.
- joshribakoff 1mo ago
  Oh please, you sound so disingenuous, the claim wasn’t that the documents contained a specific phrase. You’re moving the goal posts. Their name is literally a play on anthropomorphising the models, such as… the ceo going on tv shows and repeatedly saying the models may be conscious and they may start nuclear wars, etc.
  - infinite_spin 1mo ago
    I'm content with my response.

mrheosuper 1mo ago

I've seen a lot of cursor app, about some PO that has an idea for an app in the morning, then asking her agent to make it when her commuting, when arrive at office the app is done

onion2k 1mo ago

Claude has a /goal function that explicitly says it'll carry on working until it's done what you prompted it to do. That's exactly what a 'AI will zero-shot anything' believer is looking for. Behind the scenes it's really multi-shotting with generated prompts, but the user won't care.