← Back to context

Comment by lagniappe

15 hours ago

That is not a meaningful metric given that we don't live in 1996 and neither do our web standards.

In what year was it meaningful to have pelicans riding bicycles?

  • SVG is a current standard. Do not be coy just to satisfy your urge to disagree.

    • The website is live and renders correctly on my Safari mobile: https://www.spacejam.com/1996/

      I may have missed something but where are we saying the website should be recreated with 1996 tech or specs? The model is free to use any modern CSS, there is no technical limitations. So yes I genuinely think it is a good generalization test, because it is indeed not in the training set, and yet it is easy an easy task for a human developer.

    • The point stands. Whether or not the standard is current has no relevance for the ability of the "AI" to produce the requested content. Either it can or can't.

      2 replies →

> neither do our web standards

I'd be curious about that actually, feel like W3C specifications (I don't mean browser support of them) rarely deprecate and precisely try to keep the Web running.

Yes, now please prepare an email template which renders fine in outlook using modern web standards. Write it up if you succeed, front page of HN guaranteed!