Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | nextlevelwizard's commentslogin

As someone who used to do this. OpenAI models refuse to look up calories unless you explicitly tell them to and even then it is a hit and miss even if you tell them exactly what the product is. Easiest way to get good calculation is to just take a photo of the nutrition label or feed that info in by hand.

Funny thing is 4o did look up calories but I guess it was too good for this world


I exclusively use thinking mode, which is slower but much more likely to double-check things with web search etc.

Maybe. I stopped using OpenAI a while ago. But taking pictures of the nutrition labels was good enough

And it can be made better easily. Take a picture of the nutrition label of the bread and cheese first and then feed in this picture and you should get way better results

The sandwich example is silly because you almost certainly know the fill nutiritonal info from the packaging so just use that...

I used LLMs to count calories, but not based on photos, I mean I also did that, but primarily I fed in my exact ingredients and then used weights to get calorie estimates.

Was it always correct? Certainly not. But it helped me lose 30kg of weight since keeping even some track of calories was so much easier with LLM than any app I had used before.

Also of course it didn’t matter if I was exactly on point since it wasn’t about any kind of medicine


Curious, why it was easier to use an LLM vs a non-AI app with a DB of foods?

Seems that in this case a traditional approach would be more precise and more environmentally efficient to get to the same results.


Any app I have used before has asked me to look up the foods and add them manually and usually there has been ads or subscriptions involved.

Much easier for me to take pictures of the packets while making the food, the weight the final bulk product and then when I eat just weight the plate and say “500g of casserole” and the LLM spits out the calories and keeps track of the daily consumption


Nice. I vibe coded a similar kind of system, you can dump a recipe into the chat window and it will use tool-calling to lookup macros for any foods it doesn't have in the DB and put them in, estimate raw -> cooked changes in nutrition and weight (if needed), estimate total weight of the cooked product, and macros per gram (e.g. writes a 100 gram serving to the db, you can scale it up and down and it scales the macros linearly). Similar to you I have used this app to alter my macro mix from high-fat to high-carb (for workout performance) and cut my sodium from ~4g/day to ~2.4g/day by interrogating the DB about what foods I should eat more and less of. Found some surprising wins in my habitual diet that were easy to change to hit my health targets, and looking up and logging these things by hand without LLM assistance would have been too tedious and time-consuming for me to continue to do it for as long as I have been (maybe 3 months now)

Curious, what model are you using? I have found Qwen Flash to be really great for this - tool calling works well, it's smart enough, and very cheap.


Are you giving the LLM the weights of the ingredients as you go? Sounds like a great system.

The data entry is a pain in the ass with those apps when cooking food from scratch. It’s much much easier with LLMs and natural language and voice mode and pictures of a food scale and things like that.

I guess I better just use same password everywhere then…

I really think it is ego. Blizzard is the king of MMO makers, they can’t do anything wrong in their own eyes. They have the data that shows that people want to just play alone and care about the story above everything while completely refusing to acknowledge that the game never was about either of those and that game play style only rose up later as the MMO part got lost.

If Blizzard was to hire the turtle team and add all their content into a real classic plus experience that would be admitting that Blizzard is incapable of doing that faithfully and if it got popular then that raises even more questions about Blizzard and their C suites decisions


Turtle wow definitely wasn’t a roguelike it was “Classic Plus” experience with new class/race combinations, all new races, new zones, and new quests

If you just make “wow but with different graphics” how long until Blizzard sues you?

Wow but with different graphics is pretty much every MMO that has come out since 2004.

I guess you haven't played many MMOs. Unless you just mean "it moves like wow and and has quests" because that is not what I meant. I meant that you have to make a whole new world with its own lore and all new quests and NPCs and monsters and spells and classes and whatever. You can't literally just slap a coat of paint on WoW and expect to get away with it.

I am running ollama as back end and open webui as front end. It handled downloading and swapping between models.

What is the llama-cpp alternative?


Yeah, both players were either rogues or tabaxi (although feline swiftness isn’t dashing)

This is also directly why I don’t like D&D. It is way too combat focused and video gamey. If your combat system is so complex that people find (or even feel that they need to find) “exploits” in it then your system probably sucks. So many class features are purely combat focused completely ignoring the actual roleplaying part of role playing games.

Also the “counter chaining” feels odd to me, is this something that actually happens? Like people waste spellslots counterspelling a counterspell?


From my limited experience, many players and DMs seem to get things backwards in exactly the way you're describing. They take the rulebook as the starting point or the "controls" for the game and since combat is the most detailed they tend to focus on that to the exclusion of other parts of the game. I've always viewed the rules as a way of settling disputes or uncertainty instead, so you start from the role playing and only resort to rules when you need fair adjudication or clarification on complicated situations. i.e. don't give me quotes from the rulebook, tell me what your character does and we'll work it out as part of the story.


When most of the games rules are about a thing that thing becomes the focal point. 5e also assumes pretty high amount of combat encounters per day to keep all classes in balance, if you are having less then it will make some classes just bad picks which can feel bad

Personally I don’t like it when people don’t play by the rules of the game we have decided to play together, so definitely things should work as the rules say and then ambiguous things are sorted with GMs world’s logic as “rulings”.

If you start by ignoring the rules and only consulting them when there is a dispute then I want to play another game with less rules to begin with


I guess it depends if you want the game to be a grind for the next level or if you want real interactive fiction. Different people like different things.


It really just depends on do you play D&D or something else. It is perfect fine if you don’t want to play by the rules, but then you aren’t playing the game and we might as well just stop pretending and pick a better system


> If your combat system is so complex that people find (or even feel that they need to find) “exploits” in it then your system probably sucks.

Couple of things.

1. People will try to find exploits in just about any system. That's kind of part of the fun.

2. If the difficulty curve sucks in a particular D&D campaign - that's the DM's fault, not the system's. Plenty of tools at DM's disposal to make campaigns less combat focused or being more lenient to players.


Eh, I don’t find it fun because if you can break the combat then you either decide not to play “optimally” or GM has to purposefully create situations to fuck with you specially which is just antagonistic

I don’t know how you go to difficulty curve


re: grapple leapfrog, it links to this question: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/136964

Maybe the AI used the accepted answer (with 4 votes vs the next with 39) and then mangled things from there?

re: counter chaining, I think so. I spent some time watching Critical Role and iirc they liked to counterspell a counterspell.


First one is pretty easy. The player is just trying to do RAW instead of intention. Intent obviously is that while dragging every feet of actual movement costs two of your characters movement allowance, so dropping the burden doesn’t give you more movement.

Countering a counterspell feels like a waste since for one you have to have another caster with counter spell and now they are wasting their reaction plus a slot instead of just going another round. I guess there are situations where that makes sense, but somehow feels bad


These are actually fun to run. Just checked from work who makes most commits and found I have as many commits in past 2 years as 3 next people.

That probably isn’t a good sign


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: