Paste a URL or a prompt. Get a launch video, written and rendered by Opus 5.5 on an OpenComputer serverless agent. No video model.
223 comments
Made entirely with Opus 5.5 + $3.21 of OpenRouter API usageClaude Code Workflow
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1wogab3/
Jaw literally dropped. I ran the prompt from the "Made entirely with Opus 5.5" post on my own project. Here's what Claude Code made on its own for about $4.Claude Code Workflow
How far away are we from “build a startup that generates $1M MRR, my openrouter key is in my .env”?
Does the js stuff render real-time?
Did you get script/dialog and voice settings (again, for making other films in same series/theme) - or just the rendered audio?
It was good enough that our CEO and marketing team are in a room trying different ideas with it after I showed it to them an hour ago.
The one shot video was brilliant and polished. It would need minor refinement before presenting to a customer, because it used some of that internal vocabulary Claude makes up to describe parts of a system it's working on.
However: I found the explainer astoundingly useful to me. Now, finally, I understand some of that internal vocabulary Claude's been burying me with. The visuals really helped round out my understanding of what it's been talking about.
Instead we've worked out how to get the LLM to make videos.
Neither gives any guarantee. Both static text and videos can be done well and badly. But I usually find it useful to have both. A video is like being guided through their vision of what the thing is (a "push" message). This can be annoying to many nerd types who want to cut through all that and just want to "pull" the info they need, for themselves, at their own fast pace, quickly identifying it and not being spoonfed. But the typical user is not like this, and prefers the spoonfed/edutained approach.
Video that cover different parts of an outline are a great use of videos. Videos that try to cover too much all in one are a lesser use. Yes, you can use scrub to find in a video, but showing a text outline and letting users click to reveal videos for specifics topics works very well.
I built https://gallotails.com/ because I am a cocktail enthusiast. First commit, March 6th 2019. One of the features I am proud is which cocktails you can build based on your ingredients, and I was smart, the bar ignores garnishes and can suggest cocktails you're one ingredient away. But you have to add the ingredients. And interpret the bar screen.
And here's what I did with ChatGPT a few days ago: https://chatgpt.com/share/6ab59877-4b74-83e8-8da5-966d9f3a38...
Clicked the microphone icon and rambled for a few seconds (could have just taken a picture too I guess). Nudged ChatGPT to only give me simple cocktails I can stir instead of using a mixer. Said I could buy a lime, sure. Then asked how to keep the ginger beer fresh.
There is NO WAY I can code all of that in my little gallotails.com - a single chat window has entirely replaced my site. And that's my pet little project I do it on weekends, mostly to keep my tech skills sharp. I can only imagine what the biggest cocktails website, actual companies, are going / will go through once more and more people just realize the chat tab is enough. And I am not talking about purely content, ChatGPT can do everything my site does, and more, into any direction, in an instant.
Which left me with the question, then what should my site be? Community? To be taken over by agents?
Currently munching on what sites like mine should do, and what they should be.
Eg from your share, the model output “I prefer it Scotch-heavy rather than 50/50 because otherwise it gets very sweet.”
It’s basically cribbed this from someone; it literally can’t taste.
The frontier labs are not yet able to do rlvr over mixology/meatspace. So maybe think on how to capitalize on that.
My software development process feels exactly like every debugging session in the holodeck that seemed terribly unrealistic to me.
I'm in SRE so systems reasoning is something of the value. But me writing code or even configuring stuff? That's dead. It is a total waste of time - Claude can do it better, faster and it works.
Chatgpt would shit on my great grandma's waffle recipe but it's the one I'll keep making till the day I die.
- Video devlogs were long a shitty way to make a community (I can explain this one in more detail, but in short, the tradeoff between opportunity cost and video quality is a Pareto curve that is bad at all points on the curve, if your goals include both “make game” and “build community for players with devlogs”, the way out is to drop one of those two requirements, either “make YouTube/Twitch/TikTok channel” replaces “make game”, or you build some other audience for your devlogs)
- Good devlogs don’t have that level of detail, to let people easily recreate games
- Most games can’t easily be replicated by LLMs, in short, the people who are good at steering LLMs like that are making their own games.
This is not the first time I heard this story. Sometimes it comes with the lamentation “back in the day people could build communities with devlogs” and no, that was generally not a good way to build communities. It was mostly good streams from YouTubers who were making the game in order to make YouTube content or it was mediocre streams from random devs. Throw in a few people who are famous game devs who choose to stream and get a big audience because they already have a community.
And that's why we can't have good things...
(This is just gonna keep happening more and more until eventually we'll need something like a patent system for ideas)
> That's why I created isitsaas.io: your platform for determining whether your llm wrapper has product potential, or whether people would rather just use claude directly instead. Simply pop in your business idea, and our award winning, proprietary technology will ask claude if you can make money off of it.
> Trial memberships start at $10/month
Then it’s sufficiently non-obvious. I believe there’s still a pretty big field of things that fall into this category. Making proper things is a lot more than writing some code.
I've been playing with an LLM backed reference checker for my partner who is a lecturer. For each reference in some work she's marking an agent is dispatched to read the referenced source and check that the reference is correct / accurate / not hallucinated.
It's useful to her, but it feels like it would be a waste of effort to turn into a product, because pasting the same document into Claude/ChatGPT with a prompt like "download and read each reference etc" would work pretty much just as well.
I had similar concerns about an AI backed training generation company I interviewed with. I asked how they saw themselves competing with increasingly capable generic harnesses. I don't recall exactly what they said but the impression I got was they were so focused on competing with the big LMS players that they hadn't really considered it.
Back in the days, when I made websites or home pages for clients, my first question was: "What's your message you want to tell with your website?" Sometimes the client couldn't answer this, because he simply wanted a website for the sake of having a website. But a website without a message is meaningless more or less.
A good consultant / contractor understands the implicit requirements and is able to ask the right questions that the client is able to answer instead or planting traps, gotchas, and acting like a mean teacher examining a naughty student.
Yes, likely the client wanted a website because it was trendy and competitors were starting to have websites and he didn't want to be left behind. Now, that you sneered enough at this business wanting to stay in business, you can actually advise them. Maybe they don't have a message. Maybe they never had to think about things that way, because they never made this type of branding decisions and operated in the old offline word, based on word of mouth, old types of ads, phone calling people whatnot.
And a website can be quite meaningful without branding messaging. For example a valid message is: this is our address, this is our phone number, here is our team, our product descriptions and so on. Or for that type of business: the opening hours, etc.
I think this is part of the reason users like working with AI better, because it actually helps them get to the thing they actually want, instead of gatekeeping and testing whether the client is worthy and deserving enough to have a website made for them.
That said, there was an entire industry out there cranking out these """fun""" explainer videos, so there must be some market for it out there.
Not anymore, looks like.
When I visit a website, I'm usually looking for information and not for a message.
Some of the stuff I've seen is mindblowingly impressive in how they've captured quality creative decisions, and how the models can reason about visually appealing designs.
It understands things like continuity, themes, facial expressions, cultural memes/references, symbolism, etc. And it generates things using a lot of multi-modal behavior by using 3d, images, etc.
Some really incredibly impressive stuff.
> After all, I undertook to tell several trillion years of human history in the space of a short story and I leave it to you as to how well I succeeded. I also undertook another task, but I won't tell you what that was lest l spoil the story for you.
The drawing/animation style feels suitably off from xkcd - more naive stick figure, than what xkcd looks like?
Some speed/timing issues with the walk cycles.
For all that - mind-blowing that it's generated so quickly.
Read the full thread on Hacker News →
Related stories
- Hacker News · 215 points · 2 days ago
- Hacker News · 4 points · about 13 hours ago
- Ars Technica · 0 points · 8 days ago
- DEV Community · 21 points · 6 days ago
- Hacker News · 1 points · 1 day ago
- Ars Technica · 0 points · 13 days ago