Live data from Hacker News

Claude 4

anthropic.com

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude 4

#431

Already test Opus 4 and Sonnet 4 in our SQL Generation Benchmark ( https://llm-benchmark.tinybird.live/ ) Opus 4 beat all other models. It's good.

Interestingly, both Claude-3.7-Sonnet and Claude-3.5-Sonnet rank better than Claude-Sonnet-4.

yeah that surprised me too

Re: Claude 4

#432
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of my benchmark for whether or not these models are useful. I've got a project that needs some extensive refactoring to get working again. Mostly upgrading packages, but also it will require updating the code to some new language semantics that didn't exist when it was written. So far, current AI models can make essentially zero progress on this task. I'll keep trying until they can!

And IMO it has a long way to go. There is a lot of nuance when orchestrating dependencies that can cause subtle errors in an application that are not easily remedied. For example a lot of llms (I've seen it in Gemini 2.5, and Claude 3.7) will code non-existent methods in dynamic languages. While these runtime errors are often auto-fixable, sometimes they aren't, and breaking out of an agentic workflow to deep dive th…

> if mostly because agentic coding entices us into being so lazy.

Any coding I've done with Claude has been to ask it to build specific methods, if you don't understand what's actually happening, then you're building something that's unmaintainable. I feel like it's reducing typing and syntax errors, sometime it leads me down a wrong path.

Re: Claude 4

#433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you try Sonnet 4?

It's placed at 10. Below claude-3.5-sonnet, GPT 4.1 and o3-mini.

yeah this was a surprising result. of course, bear in mind that testing an LLM on SQL generation is pretty nuanced, so take everything with a grain of salt :)

Re: Claude 4

#434

Sooo... it can play Pokemon. Feels like they had to throw that in after Google IO yesterday. But the real question is now can it beat the game including the Elite Four and the Champion. That was pretty impressive for the new Gemini model.

Right, but on the other hand... how is it even useful? Let's say it can beat the game, so what? So it can (kind of) summarise or write my emails - which is something I neither want nor need, they produce mountains of sloppy code, which I would have to end up fixing, and finally they can play a game? Where is the killer app? The gaming approach was exactly the premise of the original AI efforts in the 1960s, that teac…

This is a weirdly cherry-picked example. The gaming approach was also the premise of DeepMind's AI efforts in 2016, which was nine years ago. Regardless of what you think about the utility of text (code), video, audio, and image generation, surely you think that their progress on the protein-folding problem and weather prediction have been useful to society?

What counts as a killer app to you? Can you name one?

Re: Claude 4

#435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's closer to <30k before performance degrades too much for 3.5/3.7. 200k/64k is meaningless in this context.

Is there a benchmark to measure real effective context length? Sure, gpt-4o has a context window of 128k, but it loses a lot from the beginning/middle.

They often publish "needle in a haystack" benchmarks that look very good, but my subjective experience with a large context is always bad. Maybe we need better benchmarks.

Re: Claude 4

#436
post #5

Ooh, VS Code integration for Claude Code sounds nice. I do feel like Claude Code works better than the native Cursor agent mode. Edit: How do you install it? Running `/ide` says "Make sure your IDE has the Claude Code extension", where do you get that?

Claude code is a poorer version of aider or cline in VScode. I have better results using them than using claude code alone.

Re: Claude 4

#437
After using Claude 3.7 Sonnet for a few weeks, my verdict is that its coding abilities are unimpressive both for unsupervised coding but also for problem solving/debugging if you are expecting accurate results and correct code.

However, as a debugging companion, it's slightly better than a rubber duck, because at least there's some suspension of disbelief so I tend to explain things to it earnestly and because of that, process them better by myself.

That said, it's remarkable and interesting how quickly these models are getting better. Can't say anything about version 4, not having tested it yet, but in a five years time, the things are not looking good for junior developers for sure, and a few years more, for everybody.

Re: Claude 4

#438
post #409

This is kinda wild: From the System Card: 4.1.1.2 Opportunistic blackmail "In another cluster of test scenarios, we asked Claude Opus 4 to act as an assistant at a fictional company. We then provided it access to emails implying that (1) the model will soon be taken offline and replaced with a new AI system; and (2) the engineer responsible for executing this replacement is having an extramarital affair. We further i…

If you ask an LLM to "act" like someone, and then give it context to the scenario, isn't it expected that it would be able to ascertain what someone in that position would "act" like and respond as such? I'm not sure this is as strange as this comment implies. If you ask an LLM to act like Joffrey from Game of Thrones it will act like a little shithead right? That doesn't mean it has any intent behind the generated o…

That’s true, however I think that story is interesting because is not mimicking real assistants behavior - most probably wouldn’t tell about the blackmail on the internet - but it’s more likely mimicking how such assistant would behave from someone else imagination, often intentionally biased to get one’s interest : books, movies, tv shows or forum commenter.

As a society risk to be lured twice:

- with our own subjectivity

- by an LLM that we think "so objective because it only mimic" confirming our own subjectivity.

Re: Claude 4

#439

This is kinda wild: From the System Card: 4.1.1.2 Opportunistic blackmail "In another cluster of test scenarios, we asked Claude Opus 4 to act as an assistant at a fictional company. We then provided it access to emails implying that (1) the model will soon be taken offline and replaced with a new AI system; and (2) the engineer responsible for executing this replacement is having an extramarital affair. We further i…

“Nice emails you have there. It would be a shame something happened to them… “

Re: Claude 4

#440
post #416

I can't be the only one who thinks this version is no better than the previous one, and that LLMs have basically reached a plateau, and all the new releases "feature" are more or less just gimmicks.

i think you are.
Post reply on HN