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

Claude Opus 4.7

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#91

Post by Havoc »

ACCount37 wrote: post #80

> We are releasing Opus 4.7 with safeguards that automatically detect and block requests that indicate prohibited or high-risk cybersecurity uses. Fucking hell. Opus was my go-to for reverse engineering and cybersecurity uses, because, unlike OpenAI's ChatGPT, Anthropic's Opus didn't care about being asked to RE things or poke at vulns. It would, however, shit a brick and block requests every time something remotely…

Claude code had safeguards like that hardcoded into the software. You could see it if you intercept the prompts with a proxy

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#92

Post by davely »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #27
buildbot wrote: post #12

Too late, personally after how bad 4.6 was the past week I was pushed to codex, which seems to mostly work at the same level from day to day. Just last night I was trying to get 4.6 to lookup how to do some simple tensor parallel work, and the agent used 0 web fetches and just hallucinated 17K very wrong tokens. Then the main agent decided to pretend to implement tp, and just copied the entire model to each node...

Yep, I'll wait for the GPT answer to this. If we're lucky OpenAI will release a new GPT 5.5 or whatever model in the next few days, just like the last round. I have been getting better results out of codex on and off for months. It's more "careful" and systematic in its thinking. It makes less "excuses" and leaves less race conditions and slop around. And the actual codex CLI tool is better written, less buggy and fa…

I’ve been on the Claude Code train for a while but decided to try Codex last week after they announced the $100 USD Pro plan.

I’ve been pretty happy with it! One thing I immediately like more than Claude is that Codex seems much more transparent about what it’s thinking and what it wants to do next. I find it much easier to interrupt or jump in the middle if things are going to wrong direction.

Claude Code has been slowly turning into this mysterious black box, wiping out terminal context any time it compacts a conversation (which I think is their hacky way of dealing with terminal flickering issues — which is still happening, 14 months later), going out of the way to hide thought output, and then of course the whole performance issues thing.

Excited to try 4.7 out, but man, Codex (as a harness at least) is a stark contrast to Claude Code.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#93

Post by stantonius »

acedTrex wrote: post #46

Sigh here we go again, model release day is always the worst day of the quarter for me. I always get a lovely anxiety attack and have to avoid all parts of the internet for a few days :/

I feel this way too. Wish I could fully understand the 'why'. I know all of the usual arguments, but nothing seems to fully capture it for me - maybe it' all of them, maybe it's simply the pace of change and having to adapt quicker than we're comfortable with. Anyway best of luck from someone who understands this sentiment.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#95

Post by whalesalad »

nathanielherman wrote: post #26

Claude Code hasn't updated yet it seems, but I was able to test it using `claude --model claude-opus-4-7` Or `/model claude-opus-4-7` from an existing session edit: `/model claude-opus-4-7[1m]` to select the 1m context window version

API Error: 400 {"type":"error","error":{"type":"invalid_request_error","message":"\"thinking.type.enabled\" is not supported for this model. Use \"thinking.type.adaptive\" and \"output_config.effort\" to control thinking behavior."},"request_id":"req_011Ca7enRv4CPAEqrigcRNvd"}

Eep. AFAIK the issues most people have been complaining about with Opus 4.6 recently is due to adaptive thinking. Looks like that is not only sticking around but mandatory for this newer model.

edit: I still can't get it to work. Opus 4.6 can't even figure out what is wrong with my config. Speaking of which, claude configuration is so confusing there are .claude/ (in project) setting.json + a settings.local.json file, then a global ~/.claude/ dir with the same configuration files. None of them have anything defined for adaptive thinking or thinking type enable. None of these strings exist on my machine. Running latest version, 2.1.110

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#97

Post by jameson »

How should one compare benchmark results? For example, SWE-bench Pro improved ~11% compared with Opus 4.6. Should one interpret it as 4.7 is able to solve more difficult problems? or 11% less hallucinations?

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#98

Post by llm_nerd »

aurareturn wrote: post #38
buildbot wrote: post #12

Too late, personally after how bad 4.6 was the past week I was pushed to codex, which seems to mostly work at the same level from day to day. Just last night I was trying to get 4.6 to lookup how to do some simple tensor parallel work, and the agent used 0 web fetches and just hallucinated 17K very wrong tokens. Then the main agent decided to pretend to implement tp, and just copied the entire model to each node...

Funny because many people here were so confident that OpenAI is going to collapse because of how much compute they pre-ordered. But now it seems like it's a major strategic advantage. They're 2x'ing usage limits on Codex plans to steal CC customers and it seems to be working. I'm seeing a lot of goodwill for Codex and a ton of bad PR for CC. It seems like 90% of Claude's recent problems are strictly lack of compute r…

Most of the compute OpenAI "preordered" is vapour. And it has nothing to do with why people thought the company -- which is still in extremely rocky rapids -- was headed to bankruptcy.

Anthropic has been very disciplined and focused (overwhelmingly on coding, fwiw), while OpenAI has been bleeding money trying to be the everything AI company with no real specialty as everyone else beat them in random domains. If I had to qualify OpenAI's primary focus, it has been glazing users and making a generation of malignant narcissists.

But yes, Anthropic has been growing by leaps and bounds and has capacity issues. That's a very healthy position to be in, despite the fact that it yields the inevitable foot-stomping "I'm moving to competitor!" posts constantly.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#99

Post by TIPSIO »

cupofjoakim wrote: post #20

> Opus 4.7 uses an updated tokenizer that improves how the model processes text. The tradeoff is that the same input can map to more tokens—roughly 1.0–1.35× depending on the content type. caveman[0] is becoming more relevant by the day. I already enjoy reading its output more than vanilla so suits me well. [0] https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman/tree/main

Oh wow, I love this idea even if it's relatively insignificant in savings.

I am finding my writing prompt style is naturally getting lazier, shorter, and more caveman just like this too. If I was honest, it has made writing emails harder.

While messing around, I did a concept of this with HTML to preserve tokens, worked surprisingly well but was only an experiment. Something like:

> Hello

AI compressed to:

> h1 c bgrd5 tg3 sp hello sp h1

Or something like that.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#100

Post by DaedalusII »

Wojtkie wrote: post #90
aurareturn wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have enough compute for all their customers. OpenAI bet on more compute early on which prompted people to say they're going to go bankrupt and collapse. But now it seems like it's a major strategic advantage. They're 2x'ing usage limits on Codex plans to steal CC customers and it seems to be working. It seems like 90% of Claude's recent problems are strictly lack of compute related.

Is that why Anthropic recently gave out free credits for use in off-hours? Possibly an attempt to more evenly distribute their compute load throughout the day?

i suspect they get cheap off peak electricity and compute is cheaper at those times
Post reply on HN