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

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#71

Post by jama211 »

blibble wrote: post #17

> We build Claude with Claude. Our engineers write code with Claude Code every day well that explains quite a bit

It’s extremely successful, not sure what it explains other than your biases

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#72

Post by legitster »

I'm still not sure I understand Anthropic's general strategy right now.

They are doing these broad marketing programs trying to take on ChatGPT for "normies". And yet their bread and butter is still clearly coding.

Meanwhile, Claude's general use cases are... fine. For generic research topics, I find that ChatGPT and Gemini run circles around it: in the depth of research, the type of tasks it can handle, and the quality and presentation of the responses.

Anthropic is also doing all of these goofy things to try to establish the "humanity" of their chatbot - giving it rights and a constitution and all that. Yet it weirdly feels the most transactional out of all of them.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a paying Claude customer and love what it's good at. I just think there's a disconnect between what Claude is and what their marketing department thinks it is.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#75

Post by nubg »

simonw wrote: post #50
Someone1234 wrote: post #19

Does anyone with more insight into the AI/LLM industry happen to know if the cost to run them in normal user-workflows is falling? The reason I'm asking is because "agent teams" while a cool concept, it largely constrained by the economics of running multiple LLM agents (i.e. plans/API calls that make this practical at scale are expensive). A year or more ago, I read that both Anthropic and OpenAI were losing money o…

The cost per token served has been falling steadily over the past few years across basically all of the providers. OpenAI dropped the price they charged for o3 to 1/5th of what it was in June last year thanks to "engineers optimizing inferencing", and plenty of other providers have found cost savings too. Turns out there was a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of inference optimization that hadn't been plucked yet. >…

> "engineers optimizing inferencing"

are we sure this is not a fancy way of saying quantization?

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#78

Post by yieldcrv »

avaer wrote: post #31
GenerocUsername wrote: post #11

This is huge. It only came out 8 minutes ago but I was already able to bootstrap a 12k per month revenue SaaS startup!

Rest assured that when/if this becomes possible, the model will not be available to you. Why would big AI leave that kind of money on the table?

9 months ago the rumor in SF was that the offers to the superintelligence team were so high because the candidates were using unreleased models or compute for derivatives trading

so then they're not really leaving money on the table, they already got what they were looking for and then released it

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#80

Post by simonw »

I'm disappointed that they're removing the prefill option: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/about-claude/models/what...

> Prefilling assistant messages (last-assistant-turn prefills) is not supported on Opus 4.6. Requests with prefilled assistant messages return a 400 error.

That was a really cool feature of the Claude API where you could force it to begin its response with e.g. `They suggest structured outputs or system prompting as the alternative but I really liked the prefill method, it felt more reliable to me.

Post reply on HN