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

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#501

Post by accrual »

shawnz wrote: post #456
simonw wrote: post #203

I'm finding the "adaptive thinking" thing very confusing, especially having written code against the previous thinking budget / thinking effort / etc modes: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/adapti... Also notable: 4.7 now defaults to NOT including a human-readable reasoning token summary in the output, you have to add "display": "summarized" to get that: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-…

Note that for Claude Code, it looks like they added a new undocumented command line argument `--thinking-display summarized` to control this parameter, and that's the only way to get thinking summaries back there. VS Code users can write a wrapper script which contains `exec "$@" --thinking-display summarized` and set that as their claudeCode.claudeProcessWrapper in VS Code settings in order to get thinking summaries…

Here is additional discussion and hacks around trying to retain Thinking output in Claude Code (prior to this release):

https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/8477

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#502

Post by cyanydeez »

vessenes wrote: post #424
cyanydeez wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's likely hiding the model downgrade path they require to meet sustainable revenue. Should be interesting if they can enshittify slowly enough to avoid the ablative loss of customers! Good luck all VCs!

They have super sustainable revenue. They are deadly supply constrained on compute, and have a really difficult balancing act over the next year or two in which they have to trade off spending that limited compute on model training so that they can stay ahead, while leaving enough of it available for customers that they can keep growing number of customers.

IT's cute you think they're gonna do any full training of a model. As soon as they can extract cash from the machine, the better.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#503

Post by rubinlinux »

LostMyLogin wrote: post #431
avaer wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Still trying to get a decent pelican out of this one but the new thinking stuff is tripping me up Wouldn't that be p-hacking where p stands for pelican?

Input: I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive? Output: Walk. It'll take you under a minute, and driving 50 meters barely gets the engine warm — plus you'd just have to park again at the other end. Honestly, by the time you started the car, you'd already be there on foot. --- I asked it to figure out why it made the mistake: "Physical/spatial common sense. Exactly what just happe…

  | I want to wash my car. The car wash is 50 meters away. Should I walk or drive?

  ● Drive. The car needs to be at the car wash.
Wonder if this is just randomness because its an LLM, or if you have different settings than me?

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#504

Post by cesarvarela »

I'd recommend anyone to ask Claude to show used context and thinking effort on its status line, something like:

``` #!/bin/bash input=$(cat) DIR=$(echo "$input" | jq -r '.workspace.current_dir // empty') PCT=$(echo "$input" | jq -r '.context_window.used_percentage // 0' | cut -d. -f1) EFFORT=$(jq -r '.effortLevel // "default"' ~/.claude/settings.json 2>/dev/null) echo "${DIR/#$HOME/~} | ${PCT}% | ${EFFORT}" ```

Because the TUI it is not consistent when showing this and sometimes they ship updates that change the default.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#506

Post by 2001zhaozhao »

zarzavat wrote: post #336
lanyard-textile wrote: post #200

This comment thread is a good learner for founders; look at how much anguish can be put to bed with just a little honest communication. 1. Oops, we're oversubscribed. 2. Oops, adaptive reasoning landed poorly / we have to do it for capacity reasons. 3. Here's how subscriptions work. Am I really writing this bullet point? As someone with a production application pinned on Opus 4.5, it is extremely difficult to tell ap…

These threads are always full of superstitious nonsense. Had a bad week at the AIs? Someone at Anthropic must have nerfed the model! The roulette wheel isn't rigged, sometimes you're just unlucky. Try another spin, maybe you'll do better. Or just write your own code.

Start vibe-coding -> the model does wonders -> the codebase grows with low code quality -> the spaghetti code builds up to the point where the model stops working -> attempts to fix the codebase with AI actually make it worse -> complain online "model is nerfed"

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#507

Post by sersi »

From a quick tests, it seems to hallucinate a lot more than opus 4.6. I like to ask random knowledge questions like "What are the best chinese rpgs with a decent translations for someone who is not familiar with them? The classics one should not miss?" and 4.6 gave accurate answers, 4.7 hallucinated the name of games, gave wrong information on how to run them etc...

Seems common for any type of slightly obscure knowledge.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#509

Post by sidrag22 »

Tiberium wrote: post #36
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

I hope people realize that tools like caveman are mostly joke/prank projects - almost the entirety of the context spent is in file reads (for input) and reasoning (in output), you will barely save even 1% with such a tool, and might actually confuse the model more or have it reason for more tokens because it'll have to formulate its respone in the way that satisfies the requirements.

I hesitated 100% when i saw caveman gaining steam, changing something like this absolutely changes the behaviour of the models responses, simply including like a "lmao" or something casual in any reply will change the tone entirely into a more relaxed style like ya whatever type mode.

I think a lot of people echo my same criticism, I would assume that the major LLM providers are the actual winners of that repo getting popular as well, for the same reason you stated.

> you will barely save even 1% with such a tool

For the end user, this doesnt make a huge impact, in fact it potentially hurts if it means that you are getting less serious replies from the model itself. However as with any minor change across a ton of users, this is significant savings for the providers.

I still think just keeping the model capable of easily finding what it needs without having to comb through a lot of files for no reason, is the best current method to save tokens. it takes some upfront tokens potentially if you are delegating that work to the agent to keep those navigation files up to date, but it pays dividends when future sessions your context window is smaller and only the proper portions of the project need to be loaded into that window.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#510

Post by JamesSwift »

whateveracct wrote: post #500
JamesSwift wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its especially concerning / frustrating because boris’s reply to my bug report on opus being dumber was “we think adaptive thinking isnt working” and then thats the last I heard of it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47668520 Now disabling adaptive thinking plus increasing effort seem to be what has gotten me back to baseline performance but “our internal evals look good“ is not good enough right now for what ma…

you're using a proprietary blackbox

Sure, but that blackbox was giving me a lot of value last month.
Post reply on HN