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

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#351

Post by bityard »

nubg wrote: post #75
simonw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

When MP3 became popular, people were amazed that you could compress audio to 1/10th its size with minor quality loss. A few decades later, we have audio compression that is much better and higher-quality than MP3, and they took a lot more effort than "MP3 but at a lower bitrate."

The same is happening in AI research now.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#352

Post by makeset »

ayhanfuat wrote: post #121

> For Opus 4.6, the 1M context window is available for API and Claude Code pay-as-you-go users. Pro, Max, Teams, and Enterprise subscription users do not have access to Opus 4.6 1M context at launch. I didn't see any notes but I guess this is also true for "max" effort level ( https://code.claude.com/docs/en/model-config#adjust-effort-l... )? I only see low, medium and high.

> it weirdly feels the most transactional out of all of them.

My experience is the opposite, it is the only LLM I find remotely tolerable to have collaborative discussions with like a coworker, whereas ChatGPT by far is the most insufferable twat constantly and loudly asking to get punched in the face.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#353

Post by jghn »

jedberg wrote: post #274
jghn wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us still *are* cynical Gen Xers, you insensitive clod!

Of course we are, I just meant back then almost all of us were. The boomers didn't really use social media back then, so it was just us latchkey kids running amok!

I know, I just couldn't miss up an opportunity to dust off the insensitive clod meme!

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#354

Post by m101 »

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…

I think actually working out whether they are losing money is extremely difficult for current models but you can look backwards. The big uncertainties are:

1) how do you depreciate a new model? What is its useful life? (Only know this once you deprecate it)

2) how do you depreciate your hardware over the period you trained this model? Another big unknown and not known until you finally write the hardware off.

The easy thing to calculate is whether you are making money actually serving the model. And the answer is almost certainly yes they are making money from this perspective, but that’s missing a large part of the cost and is therefore wrong.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#355

Post by Computer0 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #194
jama211 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Anthropic has perhaps the most embarrassing status page history I have ever seen. They are famous for downtime. https://status.claude.com/

The competition doesn't currently have all 99's - https://status.openai.com/

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#356

Post by georgeven »

ifwinterco wrote: post #340
wasmainiac wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dumb question. Can these benchmarks be trusted when the model performance tends to vary depending on the hours and load on OpenAI’s servers? How do I know I’m not getting a severe penalty for chatting at the wrong time. Or even, are the models best after launch then slowly eroded away at to more economical settings after the hype wears off?

On benchmarks GPT 5.2 was roughly equivalent to Opus 4.5 but most people who've used both for SWE stuff would say that Opus 4.5 is/was noticeably better

Interesting. Everyone in my circle said the opposite.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#357

Post by skydhash »

sbarre wrote: post #197
tayo42 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this a react feature or did they build something to translate react to text for display in the terminal?

React, the framework, is separate from react-dom, the browser rendering library. Most people think of those two as one thing because they're the most popular combo. But there are many different rendering libraries you can use with React, including Ink, which is designed for building CLI TUIs..

Anyone that knows a bit about terminals would already know that using React is not a good solution for TUI. Terminal rendering is done as a stream of characters which includes both the text and how it displays, which can also alter previously rendered texts. Diffing that is nonsense.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#358

Post by cyanydeez »

woeirua wrote: post #319

Can we talk about how the performance of Opus 4.5 nosedived this morning during the rollout? It was shocking how bad it was, and after the rollout was done it immediately reverted to it's previous behavior. I get that Anthropic probably has to do hot rollouts, but IMO it would be way better for mission critical workflows to just be locked out of the system instead of get a vastly subpar response back.

"Mission critical workflows" SHOULD NOT be reliant on a LLM model.

It's really curious what people are trying to do with these models.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#359

Post by realo »

emp17344 wrote: post #311
pb7 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He just explained a specific personal example why he is hyped up, did you read a word of it?

Yeah, I read it. “Speechless, shocked, unbelievable, insane, speechless”, etc. Not a lot of real substance there.

Give the guy a chance.

Me too I was "Speechless, shocked, unbelievable, insane, speechless" the first time I sent Claude Code on a complicated 10-year code base which used outdated cross-toolchains and APIs. It obviously did not work anymore and had not been for a long time.

I saw the AI research the web and update the embedded toolchain, APIs to external weather services, etc... into a complete working new (WORKING!) code base in about 30 minutes.

Speechless, I was ...

Post reply on HN