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

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#561

Post by slopusila »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #160
cootsnuck wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not see any reporting or evidence at all that Anthropic or OpenAI is able to make money on inference yet. > Turns out there was a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of inference optimization that hadn't been plucked yet. That does not mean the frontier labs are pricing their APIs to cover their costs yet. It can both be true that it has gotten cheaper for them to provide inference and that they still are subsid…

> they still are subsidizing inference costs. They are for sure subsidising costs on all you can prompt packages (20-100-200$ /mo). They do that for data gathering mostly, and at a smaller degree for user retention. > evidence at all that Anthropic or OpenAI is able to make money on inference yet. You can infer that from what 3rd party inference providers are charging. The largest open models atm are dsv3 (~650B para…

most of those subscriptions go unused. I barely use 10% of mine

so my unused tokens compensate for the few heavy users

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#562

Post by ck_one »

golfer wrote: post #560
ck_one wrote: post #482

Just tested the new Opus 4.6 (1M context) on a fun needle-in-a-haystack challenge: finding every spell in all Harry Potter books. All 7 books come to ~1.75M tokens, so they don't quite fit yet. (At this rate of progress, mid-April should do it ) For now you can fit the first 4 books (~733K tokens). Results: Opus 4.6 found 49 out of 50 officially documented spells across those 4 books. The only miss was "Slugulus Eruc…

There's lots of websites that list the spells. It's well documented. Could Claude simply be regurgitating knowledge from the web? Example: https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_spells

It didn't use web search. But for sure it has some internal knowledge already. It's not a perfect needle in the hay stack problem but gemini flash was much worse when I tested it last time.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#563

Post by slopusila »

zozbot234 wrote: post #56
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.e. plans/API calls that make this practical at scale are expensive Local AI's make agent workflows a whole lot more practical. Making the initial investment for a good homelab/on-prem facility will effectively become a no-brainer given the advantages on privacy and reliability, and you don't have to fear rugpulls or VC's playing the "lose money on every request" game since you know exactly how much you're paying…

on prem economics dont work because you can't batch requests. unless you are able to run 100 agents at the same time all the time

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#564

Post by mnicky »

ramesh31 wrote: post #145

Am I alone in finding no use for Opus? Token costs are like 10x yet I see no difference at all vs. Sonnet with Claude Code.

On my tasks (mostly data science), Opus has significantly lower probability of making stupid mistakes than Sonnet.

I'd still appreciate more intelligence than Opus 4.5 so I'm looking forward to trying 4.6.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#565

Post by jonatron »

Can someone ask: "what is the current carrying capacity of 25mm multicore armoured thermoplastic insulated cables with aluminium conductors, on perforated cable tray?" just to see how well it can look up information in BS 7671?

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#566

Post by wasmainiac »

tedsanders wrote: post #369
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?

We don't vary our model quality with time of day or load (beyond negligible non-determinism). It's the same weights all day long with no quantization or other gimmicks. They can get slower under heavy load, though. (I'm from OpenAI.)

Thanks for the response, I appreciate it. I do notice variation in quality throughout the day. I use it primarily for searching documentation since it’s faster than google in most case, often it is on point, but also it seems off at times, inaccurate or shallow maybe. In some cases I just end the session.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#567

Post by zamadatix »

rahulroy wrote: post #451

They are also giving away $50 extra pay as you go credit to try Opus 4.6. I just claimed it from the web usage page[1]. Are they anticipating higher token usage for the model or just want to promote the usage? [1] https://claude.ai/settings/usage

"Page not found" for me. I assume this is for currently paying accounts only or something (my subscription hasn't been active for a while), which is fair.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#568

Post by jaggederest »

jonatron wrote: post #565

Can someone ask: "what is the current carrying capacity of 25mm multicore armoured thermoplastic insulated cables with aluminium conductors, on perforated cable tray?" just to see how well it can look up information in BS 7671?

> what is the current carrying capacity of 25mm multicore armoured thermoplastic insulated cables with aluminium conductors, on perforated cable tray?

  This is an electrical engineering question rather than a software engineering one, but let me look it up for you.

  WEB SEARCH ("current carrying capacity 25mm multicore armoured thermoplastic insulated cable aluminium conductors perforated cable tray BS 7671")
   ↳ Found 10 results.

   Based on BS 7671 Table 4D4B (multicore armoured thermoplastic insulated cables with aluminium conductors), the current-carrying capacity for a 25mm cable on a perforated cable tray (Reference Method E) is approximately 80A for a 3- or 4-core cable at 30C ambient temperature and 70C conductor operating temperature.

    Note: The exact value depends on the number of cores (2-core vs 3/4-core) and whether any rating/correction factors (grouping, ambient temperature, thermal insulation) apply. I'd recommend confirming against the actual BS 7671:2018 Table 4D4B for your specific configuration, as the aluminium conductor ratings are lower than the copper equivalents (~102A for copper in the same conditions).

    This is outside my core domain of software engineering -- for critical electrical installations, always verify with the relevant standards documentation or a qualified electrical engineer.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#569

Post by djhn »

ck_one wrote: post #552
ozim wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly there was this study where they were trying to make LLM reproduce HP book word for word like giving first sentences and letting it cook. Basically they managed with some tricks make 99% word for word - tricks were needed to bypass security measures that are there in place for exactly reason to stop people to retrieve training material.

Do you remember how to get around those tricks?

This is the paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.02671

Grok and Deepmind IIRC didn’t require tricks.

Post reply on HN