Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well you‘ll need the same prompt for input tokens?
Only the first one. Ideally now there is no second prompt.
Are you aware that every tool call produces output which also counts as input to the LLM?
Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
191–200 of 620 posts
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#192AFAICT this uses a token-counting API so that it counts how many tokens are in the prompt, in two ways, so it's measuring the tokenizer change in isolation. Smarter models also sometimes produce shorter outputs and therefore fewer output tokens. That doesn't mean Opus 4.7 necessarily nets out cheaper, it might still be more expensive, but this comparison isn't really very useful.
With AIs, it seems like there never is a comparison that is useful.
yup its all vibes. And anthropic is winning on those in my book still
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
>we don't want a hard dependency on another multi-billion dollar company just to write software One of two main reasons why I'm wary of LLMs. The other is fear of skill atrophy. These two problems compound. Skill atrophy is less bad if the replacement for the previous skill does not depend on a potentially less-than-friendly party.
Not so much atrophy as apathy. I've worked with people who will look at code they don't understand, say "llm says this", and express zero intention of learning something. Might even push back. Be proud of their ignorance. It's like, why even review that PR in the first place if you don't even know what you're working with?
It’s a lot like someone bragging that they’re bad at math tossing around equations.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#194We (my wallet and I) are pretty happy with GLM 5.1 and MiniMax 2.7.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so much atrophy as apathy. I've worked with people who will look at code they don't understand, say "llm says this", and express zero intention of learning something. Might even push back. Be proud of their ignorance. It's like, why even review that PR in the first place if you don't even know what you're working with?
What is it in the broader culture that's causing this?
These people have always existed. Hell, they are here, too. Now they have a new thing to delegate responsibility to.
And no, I don't understand them at all. Taking responsibility for something, improving it, and stewarding it into production is a fantastic feeling, and much better than reading the comment section. :)
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suggest you read the sales pitches that these products have been making. Again, when I say that this is the selling point, I mean it: This is why management is buying them.
I've read the sales pitches, and they're not about replacing the need for skill. The Claude Design announcement from yesterday ( https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-design-anthropic-labs ) is pretty typical in my experience. The pitch is that this is good for designers, because it will allow them to explore a much broader range of ideas and collaborate on them with counterparties more easily. The tool will give you…
The majority of examples in the document you linked describe 'person without can do thing needing '. It's very much selling 'more output, less skill'
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#197We dropped Claude. It's pretty clear this is a race to the bottom, and we don't want a hard dependency on another multi-billion dollar company just to write software We'll be keeping an eye on open models (of which we already make good use of). I think that's the way forward. Actually it would be great if everybody would put more focus on open models, perhaps we can come up with something like the "linux/postgres/git…
>perhaps we can come up with something like the "linux/postgres/git/http/etc" of the LLMs: something we all can benefit from while it not being monopolized by a single billionarie company
Training and inference costs so we would have to pay for them.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#198We dropped Claude. It's pretty clear this is a race to the bottom, and we don't want a hard dependency on another multi-billion dollar company just to write software We'll be keeping an eye on open models (of which we already make good use of). I think that's the way forward. Actually it would be great if everybody would put more focus on open models, perhaps we can come up with something like the "linux/postgres/git…
[dead]
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a lame attitude. There are local models that are last year's SOTA, but that's not good enough because this year's SOTA is even better yet still... I've said it before and I'll say it again, local models are "there" in terms of true productive usage for complex coding tasks. Like, for real, there. The issue right now is that buying the compute to run the top end local models is absurdly unaffordable. Both in ge…
I completely see your point, but when my / developer time is worth what it is compared to the cost of a frontier model subscription, I'm wary of choosing anything but the best model I can. I would love to be able to say I have X technique for compensating for the model shortfall, but my experience so far has been that bigger, later models out perform older, smaller ones. I genuinely hope this changes through. I under…
Right; but every major generation has had diminishing returns on the last. Two years ago the difference was HUGE between major releases, and now we're discussing Opus 4.6 Vs. 4.7 and people cannot seem to agree if it is an improvement or regression (and even their data in the card shows regressions).
So my point is: If you have the attitude that unless it is the bleeding edge, it may have well not exist, then local models are never going to be good enough. But truth is they're now well exceeding what they need to be to be huge productivity tools, and would have been bleeding edge fairly recently.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#200It's increasingly looking naive to assume scaling LLMs is all you need to get to full white-collar worker replacement. The attention mechanism / hopfield network is fundamentally modeling only a small subset of the full human brain, and all the increasing sustained hype around bolted-on solutions for "agentic memory" is, in my opinion, glaring evidence that these SOTA transformers alone aren't sufficient even when yo…
> you just limit the space to text
And even then... why can't they write a novel? Or lowering the bar, let's say a novella like Death in Venice, Candide, The Metamorphosis, Breakfast at Tiffany's...?
Every book's in the training corpus...
Is it just a matter of someone not having spent a hundred grand in tokens to do it?