Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 758 posts

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#331

Post by pseudosavant »

postalcoder wrote: post #32
KingOfCoders wrote: post #3

I have been a paying ChatGPT customer for a long time (since the very beginning). Last week I've compared ChatGPT to Claude and the results (to my eye) were better, the output better structured and the canvas works better. I'm on the edge of jumping ship.

For python, at least, Sonnet’s code is much more elegant, well composed, and thoughtfully written. It also seems to be biased towards more recent code, whereas the gpt models can’t even properly write an api call to itself. o1 is pretty decent as a rotor rooter, ie the type of task that requires both lots of instruction as well as lots of context. I honestly think it works half as well as it does now because it’s abl…

It is appalling how bad GPT-4o is at writing API calls to OpenAI using Python. It is like OpenAI doesn't update their own documentation in the GPT-4o training data since GPT-3.5.

I constantly have the problem that it thinks it needs to write code for the 0.28 version of the SDK. It'll be writing >1.0 code revision after revision, and then just randomly fall back to the old SDK which doesn't work at all anymore. I always write code for interfacing with OpenAI's APIs using Claude.

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#332

Post by [deleted] »

gzer0 wrote: post #182

One of the funnier things during training with the new API (which can control your computer) was this: "Even while recording these demos, we encountered some amusing moments. In one, Claude accidentally stopped a long-running screen recording, causing all footage to be lost. Later, Claude took a break from our coding demo and began to peruse photos of Yellowstone National Park." [0] https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/1…

[deleted]

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#333

Post by [deleted] »

highwaylights wrote: post #81

Completely irrelevant, and it might just be me, but I really like Anthropic's understated branding. OpenAI's branding isn't exactly screaming in your face either, but for something that's generated as much public fear/scaremongering/outrage as LLMs have over the last couple of years, Anthropic's presentation has a much "cosier" veneer to my eyes. This isn't the Skynet Terminator wipe-us-all-out AI, it's the adorable…

[deleted]

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#334

Post by EGreg »

quantadev wrote: post #199
gzer0 wrote: post #182

One of the funnier things during training with the new API (which can control your computer) was this: "Even while recording these demos, we encountered some amusing moments. In one, Claude accidentally stopped a long-running screen recording, causing all footage to be lost. Later, Claude took a break from our coding demo and began to peruse photos of Yellowstone National Park." [0] https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/1…

I think the best use case for AI `Computer Use` would be a simple positioning of the mouse and asking for conformation before a click. For most use cases this is all people will want/need. If you don't know how to do something, it is basically teaching you how, in this case, rather than taking full control and doing things so fast you don't have time to stop of going rogue.

People would mostly just rubber-stamp it

But it would slow down the masses

Some people would jailbreak the agents though

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#337

Post by cootsnuck »

diggan wrote: post #126
hobofan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you will find similar things at essentially all other model providers. The older/bigger GPT4 runs at $30/$60 and peforms about on par with GPT4o-mini which costs only $0.15/$0.60. If you are currently, or have been integrating AI models in the past ~2 years, you should definitely keep up with model capability/pricing development. If you are staying on old models you are certainly overpaying/leaving performance o…

> The older/bigger GPT4 runs at $30/$60 and peforms about on par with GPT4o-mini which costs only $0.15/$0.60. I don't think GPT-4o Mini has comparable performance to GPT-4 at all, where are you finding the benchmarks claiming this? Everywhere I look says GPT-4 is more powerful, but GPT-4o Mini is most cost-effective, if you're OK with worse performance. Even OpenAI themselves about GPT-4o Mini: > Our affordable and…

Just switch out gpt-4o-mini for gpt-4o, the point stands. Across the board, these foundational model companies have comparable, if not more powerful, models that are cheaper than their older models.

OpenAI's own words: "GPT-4o is our most advanced multimodal model that’s faster and cheaper than GPT-4 Turbo with stronger vision capabilities."

gpt-4o:

$2.50 / 1M input tokens $10.00 / 1M output tokens

gpt-4-turbo:

$10.00 / 1M input tokens $30.00 / 1M output tokens

gpt-4:

$30.00 / 1M input tokens $60.00 / 1M ouput tokens

https://openai.com/api/pricing/

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#338

Post by jcheng »

hobofan wrote: post #189
dotancohen wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> B) potentially phase out Opus, and instead introduce new branding for what they called a "reasoning model" like OpenAI did with o1(-preview) When should we be using the -o OpenAI models? I've not been keeping up and the official information now assumes far too much familiarity to be of much use.

I think it's first important to note that there is a huge difference between -o models (GPT 4o; GPT 4o mini) and the o1 models (o1-preview; o1-mini). The -o models are "just" stronger versions of their non-suffixed predecessors. They are the latest (and maybe last?) version of models in the lineage of GPT models (roughly GPT-1 -> GPT-2 -> GPT-3 -> GPT-3.5 -> GPT-4 -> GPT-4o). The o1 models (not sure what the naming s…

Agreed with all that, and also, when used via API the o1 models don't currently support system prompts, streaming, or function calling. That rules them out for all of the uses I have.

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#339

Post by nopinsight »

This needs more discussion:

Claude using Claude on a computer for coding https://youtu.be/vH2f7cjXjKI?si=Tw7rBPGsavzb-LNo (3 mins)

True end-user programming and product manager programming are coming, probably pretty soon. Not the same thing, but Midjourney went from v.1 to v.6 in less than 2 years.

If something similar happens, most jobs that could be done remotely will be automatable in a few years.

Re: Computer use, a new Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Claude 3.5 Haiku

#340

Post by quantadev »

javajosh wrote: post #309
quantadev wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The `Hiring Process` in America is definitely BADLY broken. Maybe worldwide afaik. It's a far too difficult, time-consuming, and painful process for everyone involved. I have a feeling AI can fix this, although I'd never allow an AI bot to interview me. I just mean other ways of using AI to help the process. Also people are hired for all kinds of reasons having little to do with their qualifications lots of the time,…

AI and new tools have broken the system. The tools send you email saying things like "X corp is interested in you!" and you send a resume, and you don't hear back. Nothing, not even a rejection. Eventually you stop believing them, understanding it for the marketing spam that it is. Direct submissions are better, but only slightly. Recruiters are much better, in general, since they have a relationship with a real pers…

All that's true, and sadly it also often doesn't even matter how good you even are either. I have decades of experience and I still get "evaluated" based on how fast I can do silly brain-teaser IQ-test coding challenges.

I've gotten where any company that wants me to do a coding challenge on my own time is an immediate "no thanks" reply from me. Everyone should refuse that. But so many people are so desperate they allow hiring companies to abuse them in that way. I consider it a kind of abuse of power to demand people do like 4 to 6hrs of nonsensical coding just to buy an opportunity for an actual interview.

Post reply on HN