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

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#691

Post by kristjansson »

recallingmemory wrote: post #519
ayewo wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you will need to drink a(n identity) verification can soon [1] to continue as a security researcher on their platform. 1: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14328960-identity-ver... Identity verification on Claude Being responsible with powerful technology starts with knowing who is using it. Identity verification helps us prevent abuse, enforce our usage policies, and comply with legal obligations. W…

I'm surprised we can't just authenticate in other ways.. like a domain TXT record that proves the website I'm looking to audit for security is my own.

How would it know it’s really there, and not just a tool input/output injected into its input?

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#694

Post by Arubis »

johnmlussier wrote: post #227

They've increased their cybersecurity usage filters to the point that Opus 4.7 refuses to work on any valid work, even after web fetching the program guidelines itself and acknowledging "This is authorized research under the [Redacted] Bounty program, so the findings here are defensive research outputs, not malware. I'll analyze and draft, not weaponize anything beyond what's needed to prove the bug to [Redacted]. I…

I can barely get it to send a PDF to my printer without a flat refusal >_<

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#695

Post by andrewstuart2 »

andai wrote: post #674
davesque wrote: post #662

> We stated that we would keep Claude Mythos Preview’s release limited and test new cyber safeguards on less capable models first. Opus 4.7 is the first such model: its cyber capabilities are not as advanced as those of Mythos Preview (indeed, during its training we experimented with efforts to differentially reduce these capabilities). We are releasing Opus 4.7 with safeguards that automatically detect and block req…

The fundamental tension is that the models are getting weirdly good at hacking while still sort of sucking at a bunch of economically valuable tasks. So they've hit the point where the models are simultaneously too smart (dangerous hacking abilities) and too stupid (can't actually replace most employees). So at this point they need to make the models bigger, but they're already too big. So the only thing left to do i…

Honestly I feel sometimes like about the only thing they do successfully is hacking. Not just in the sense of breaking into systems that are assumed to be secure although also in that sense. They're just, highly effective at fumbling around with a hatchet until something works. We just happen to have version control and automated testing that generally makes that approach somewhat viable for the task of programming. But while I've been genuinely impressed at how much it can put features into a workable state, I've never been confident looking at its output that it's going to do more than POC quality at the current state of things. But it's pretty dang effective at that given enough time and a space safe to hack away and reset until the product looks close enough.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#697

Post by azrollin »

JamesSwift wrote: post #460
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-…

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…

[dead]

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#698

Post by throwatdem12311 »

Holy moly it’s slow.

An implement step for a simple delete entity endpoint in my rails app took 30 minutes. Nothing crazy but it had a couple checks it needed to do first. Very simple stuff like checking what the scheduled time is for something and checking the current status of a state machine.

I’m tempted to switch back to Opus 4.6 and have it try again for reference because holy moly it legit felt way slower than normal for these kinds of simple tasks that it would oneshot pretty effortlessly.

Also used up nearly half of my session quota just for this one task. Waaaaay more token usage than before.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#699

Post by MikeNotThePope »

aurareturn wrote: post #31
endymion-light wrote: post #16

I'm not sure how much I trust Anthropic recently. This coming right after a noticeable downgrade just makes me think Opus 4.7 is going to be the same Opus i was experiencing a few months ago rather than actual performance boost. Anthropic need to build back some trust and communicate throtelling/reasoning caps more clearly.

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.

Prepare for the prices to go up!

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#700

Post by hbbio »

pkilgore wrote: post #688
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…

Seconded. After disabling adaptive thinking and using a default higher thinking, I finally got the quality I'm looking for out of Opus 4.6, and I'm pleased with what I see so far in Opus 4.7. Whatever their internal evals say about adaptive thinking, they're measuring the wrong thing.

Unless they're measuring capex
Post reply on HN