Posted by rossant 2 days ago
I'll give an example of what I'm working on. There's a model for segmenting organs from CT scans. There's another model for calculating radial diameters of blood vessels from CT scans. You can combine the two and approximate how much blood flow each organ gets based on its segmented volume and the sum total radial diameter of vessels feeding it. You can then render all of that in an app that shows perfusion to that organ.
The idea is to combine these models to extract every ounce of usable information from a CT scan that might be useful for procedural planning (I'm an interventional radiologist). While each algorithm would take weeks/months to implement, Opus 5.5 can do them in minutes to hours and then stitch them together. The results thus far have been better than anything I've seen.
Just earlier today, I had Opus 5.5 try and read an X-ray. It struggled to give any real information.
Stitching algorithms together is also not hard.
Feels like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gId2HsHvSgs
"I made a computer out of n logic gates" doesn't sound as cool I guess?
Granted I am criticizing the concept and post title, not the execution.
Bravo to the author. This is inspiring work.
Today? Meh.
I'm starting to think people impressed by LLMs are for the first time in their life not using a hammer on fastening screws and deeply impressed by tools that font fight them every step of the way.
You don't need to prove it, that was never a requirement. You can simply say it. The only complication is that there's a fair number of people who, for some reason, really want to pass LLM output as their own. They are present on HN too. But here's another ancient trick to overcome that: reputation. Either the reputation you already have, or reputation you build over time. If you have a reputation as an honest person with genuine interest in software, you really don't have to worry, and you will have audience for your work.
What was the point before? To have fun, build a community, and to get attention of hiring managers. The first two reasons are still there. The third is more questionable, but there's still plenty of companies that hire based on what you know, not how well you prompt.
Of course there is -- ask you about it.
The coolest interview process i ever participated in (at MIT Lincoln Lab) was structured this way, and seems 100% LLM-proof. The interview was: give a talk about a cool/impressive technical thing you did for an hour and then answer questions from the interviewers about it for an hour. No way to succeed there without actually understanding.
edit: press tab first.
By way of comparison, the Intel i386 had 275,000 transistors.
claude "create a NAND gate-based computer, giving it a crappy web page"