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

Claude 4

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude 4

#81

Post by runjake »

thimabi wrote: post #67

It’s been hard to keep up with the evolution in LLMs. SOTA models basically change every other week, and each of them has its own quirks. Differences in features, personality, output formatting, UI, safety filters… make it nearly impossible to migrate workflows between distinct LLMs. Even models of the same family exhibit strikingly different behaviors in response to the same prompt. Still, having to find each model’…

My advice: don't jump around between LLMs for a given project. The AI space is progressing too rapidly right now. Save yourself the sanity.

Re: Claude 4

#82

Post by ljm »

ksec wrote: post #69

This is starting to get ridiculous. I am busy with life and have hundreds of tabs unread including one [1] about Claude 3.7 Sonnet and Claude Code and Gemini 2.5 Pro. And before any of that Claude 4 is out. And all the stuff Google announced during IO yday. So will Claude 4.5 come out in a few months and 5.0 before the end of the year? At this point is it even worth following anything about AI / LLM? [1] https://news…

[flagged]

Re: Claude 4

#83

Post by tptacek »

Have they documented the context window changes for Claude 4 anywhere? My (barely informed) understanding was one of the reasons Gemini 2.5 has been so useful is that it can handle huge amounts of context --- 50-70kloc?

Re: Claude 4

#85

Post by [deleted] »

jbellis wrote: post #6

Good, I was starting to get uncomfortable with how hard Gemini has been dominating lately ETA: I guess Anthropic still thinks they can command a premium, I hope they're right (because I would love to pay more for smarter models). > Pricing remains consistent with previous Opus and Sonnet models: Opus 4 at $15/$75 per million tokens (input/output) and Sonnet 4 at $3/$15.

[deleted]

Re: Claude 4

#86

Post by zamadatix »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #61

Is this really worthy of a claude 4 label? Was there a new pre-training run? Cause this feels like 3.8... only swe went up significantly, and that as we all understand by now is done by cramming on specific post training data and doesn't generalize to intelligence. The agentic tooluse didn't improve and this says to me that it's not really smarter.

It feels like the days of Claude 2 -> 3 or GPT 2->3 level changes for the leading models are over and you're either going to end up with really awkward version numbers or just embrace it and increment the number. Nobody cares a Chrome update gives a major version change of 136->137 instead of 12.4.2.33 -> 12.4.3.0 for similar kinds of "the version number doesn't always have to represent the amount of work/improvement compared to the previous" reasoning.

Re: Claude 4

#87

Post by MattSayar »

sali0 wrote: post #51

I've found myself having brand loyalty to Claude. I don't really trust any of the other models with coding, the only one I even let close to my work is Claude. And this is after trying most of them. Looking forward to trying 4.

Same. And I JUST tried their GitHub Action agentic thing yesterday (wrote about it here[0]), and it honestly didn't perform very well. I should try it again with Claude 4 and see if there are any differences. Should be an easy test

[0] https://mattsayar.com/personalized-software-really-is-coming...

Re: Claude 4

#90

Post by throwaway314155 »

energy123 wrote: post #79

> Finally, we've introduced thinking summaries for Claude 4 models that use a smaller model to condense lengthy thought processes. This summarization is only needed about 5% of the time—most thought processes are short enough to display in full. This is not better for the user. No users want this. If you're doing this to prevent competitors training on your thought traces then fine. But if you really believe this is…

If _you_ really believe this is what all users want, _you_ should reconsider. Your describing a feature for power users. It should be a toggle but it's silly to say it didn't improve UX for people who don't want to read strange babbling chains of thought.
Post reply on HN