Live data from Hacker News

Claude 4

anthropic.com

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude 4

#361
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With web search being available in all major user-facing LLM products now (and I believe in some APIs as well, sometimes unintentionally), I feel like the exact month of cutoff is becoming less and less relevant, at least in my personal experience. The models I'm regularly using are usually smart enough to figure out that they should be pulling in new information for a given topic.

It still matters for software packages. Particularly python packages that have to do with programming with AI! They are evolving quickly, with deprecation and updated documentation. Having to correct for this in system prompts is a pain. It would be great if the models were updating portions of their content more recently than others. For the tailwind example in parent-sibling comment, should absolutely be as up to d…

Does repo/package specific MCP solve for this at all?

Re: Claude 4

#362
post #360

I've been using Claude Opus 4 the past couple of hours. I absolutely HATE the new personality it's got. Like ChatGPT at its worst. Awful. Completely over the top "this is brilliant" or "this completely destroys the argument!" or "this is catastrophically bad for them". I hope they fix this very quickly.

It's interesting that we are in a world state in which "HATE the new personality it's got" is applied to AIs. We're living in the future ya'll :)

"His work was good, I just would never want to get a beer with him"

this is literally how you know were approaching agi

Re: Claude 4

#363

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.

So I decided to try Claude 4 Sonnet against my "Given a list of 1 million random integers between 1 and 100,000, find the difference between the smallest and the largest numbers whose digits sum up to 30." benchmark I tested against Claude 3.5 Sonnet: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42584400 The results are here ( https://gist.github.com/minimaxir/1bad26f0f000562b1418754d67... ) and it utterly crushed the proble…

Same for me, with this past year's Advent of Code. All the models until now have been stumped by Day 17 part 2. But Opus 4 finally got it! Good chance some of that is in its training data, though.

Re: Claude 4

#364
post #343

I got Claude 4 Opus to summarize this thread on Hacker News when it had hit 319 comments: https://gist.github.com/simonw/0b9744ae33694a2e03b2169722b06... Token cost: 22,275 input, 1,309 output = 43.23 cents - https://www.llm-prices.com/#it=22275&ot=1309&ic=15&oc=75&sb=... Same prompt run against Sonnet 4: https://gist.github.com/simonw/1113278190aaf8baa2088356824bf... 22,275 input, 1,567 output = 9.033 cents https://…

[deleted]

Re: Claude 4

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People's interpretation of benchmarks will largely depend on whether they believe they will be better or worse off by GenAI taking over SWE jobs. Think you'd need someone outside the industry to weigh in to have a real, unbiased view.

Or someone who has been a developer for a decade plus trying to use these models on actual existing code bases, solving specific problems. In my experience, they waste time and money.

These people are the most experienced, yes, but by the same token they also have the most incentive to disbelieve that an AI will take their job.

Re: Claude 4

#366

I've been using Claude Opus 4 the past couple of hours. I absolutely HATE the new personality it's got. Like ChatGPT at its worst. Awful. Completely over the top "this is brilliant" or "this completely destroys the argument!" or "this is catastrophically bad for them". I hope they fix this very quickly.

[deleted]

Re: Claude 4

#367
post #206

An important note not mentioned in this announcement is that Claude 4's training cutoff date is March 2025, which is the latest of any recent model. (Gemini 2.5 has a cutoff of January 2025) https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/about-claude/models/overv...

With web search being available in all major user-facing LLM products now (and I believe in some APIs as well, sometimes unintentionally), I feel like the exact month of cutoff is becoming less and less relevant, at least in my personal experience. The models I'm regularly using are usually smart enough to figure out that they should be pulling in new information for a given topic.

I was thinking that too, grok can comment on things that have only just broke out hours earlier, cutoff dates don't seem to matter much

Re: Claude 4

#368
How are Claude’s rate limits on the $20 plan? I used to hit them a lot when I subscribed ~6 months ago, to the point that I got frustrated and unsubscribed.

Re: Claude 4

#369

I really hope sonnet 4 is not obsessed with tool calls the way 3-7 is. 3-5 was sort of this magical experience where, for the first time, I felt the sense that models were going to master programming. It’s kind of been downhill from there.

This feels like more of a system prompt issue than a model issue?

Anecdotal of course, but I feel a very distinct difference between 3.5 and 3.7 when swapping between them in Cursor’s Agent mode (so the system prompt stays consistent).
Post reply on HN