Maybe one day Claude can rewrite its interface to be more accessible to blind people like me.
Anthropic are looking to make money. They need to make absolutely absurd amounts of money to afford the R&D expenses they've already incurred. Features get prioritized based on how much money they might make. Unless forced to by regulation (or maybe social pressure on the executives, but that really only comes from their same class instead of the general public these days) smaller groups of customers get served last.…
Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
141–150 of 363 posts
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#142They need to focus on fixing reliability first. Their systems constantly go down and it appears they are having to quantise the models to keep up with demand, reducing intelligence significantly. New features like this feel pointless when the underlying model is becoming unusable.
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can't be understated. I started using it heavily earlier this summer and it felt like magic. Someone signing up now based on how I described my personal experiences with it then would think I was out of my mind . For technical tasks it has been a net negative for me for the last several weeks. (Speaking of both Claude Code and the desktop app, both Sonnet and Opus >=4, on the Max plan.)
https://status.anthropic.com/incidents/72f99lh1cj2c They recently resolved two bugs affecting model quality, one of which was in production Aug 5-Sep 4. They also wrote: Importantly, we never intentionally degrade model quality as a result of demand or other factors, and the issues mentioned above stem from unrelated bugs. Sibling comments are claiming the opposite, attributing malice where the company itself says it…
Things they could do that would not technically contradict that:
- Quantize KV cache
- Data aware model quantization where their own evals will show "equivalent perf" but the overall model quality suffers.
Simple fact is that it takes longer to deploy physical compute but somehow they are able to serve more and more inference from a slowly growing pool of hardware. Something has to give...
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#144Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#145Hope not.
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#146Not Claude specific, but related to the agent model of things... I've been paying $10/month for GitHub Copilot, which I use via Microsoft's Visual Studio Code, and about a month ago, they added ChatGPT5 (preview), which uses the agent model of interaction. It's a qualitative jump that I'm still learning to appreciate in full. It seems like the worst possible thing, in terms of security, to let an LLM play with your s…
Yeah in agent mode it compiles code and runs tests, if anything breaks it attempts to fix. Kinda wild to see at first.
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's nice in theory. In practice, they require a lot of sysadmin-related work, and installing all the software inside them is no fun, even if using scripts, etc.
It's a one time time investment that most people already have partially and just needs to be transcribed (existing compose/dockerfile)
No, because the software that needs to be installed into them keeps changing (new versions, new packages, etc.)
Sysadmin is a job for a reason. And with containers you are a sysadmin for more than one system.
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://status.anthropic.com/incidents/72f99lh1cj2c They recently resolved two bugs affecting model quality, one of which was in production Aug 5-Sep 4. They also wrote: Importantly, we never intentionally degrade model quality as a result of demand or other factors, and the issues mentioned above stem from unrelated bugs. Sibling comments are claiming the opposite, attributing malice where the company itself says it…
> Importantly, we never intentionally degrade model quality as a result of demand or other factors, and the issues mentioned above stem from unrelated bugs. Things they could do that would not technically contradict that: - Quantize KV cache - Data aware model quantization where their own evals will show "equivalent perf" but the overall model quality suffers. Simple fact is that it takes longer to deploy physical co…
Is training compute interchangeable with inference compute or does training vs. inference have significantly different hardware requirements?
If training and inference hardware is pooled together, I could imagine a model where training simply fills in any unused compute at any given time (?)
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can't be understated. I started using it heavily earlier this summer and it felt like magic. Someone signing up now based on how I described my personal experiences with it then would think I was out of my mind . For technical tasks it has been a net negative for me for the last several weeks. (Speaking of both Claude Code and the desktop app, both Sonnet and Opus >=4, on the Max plan.)
Have you considered perhaps that you are, indeed, out of your mind? Or more precisely, that you could be rationalizing what is essentially a random process? Based on the discussions here it seems that every model is either about to be great or was great in the past but now is not. Sucks for those of us who are stuck in the now , though.
Re: Claude now has access to a server-side container environment
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anthropic claims that they don't degrade models under load, and the performance issues were a result of a system error: https://status.anthropic.com/incidents/72f99lh1cj2c That being said, they still have capacity issues on any day of the week that ends in Y. No clue how long would that take to resolve.
Not nitpicking, but they said: > we never intentionally degrade model quality as a result of demand or other factors Fully giving them the benefit of the doubt, I still think that still allows for a scenario like "we may [switch to quantized models|tune parameters], but our internal testing showed that these interventions didn't materially affect end user experience". I hate to parse their words in this way, because…
Intentionally might mean manually, or maybe the system does it on it's own when it thinks it's best.