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

Claude Opus 4.8

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#311

Post by TIPSIO »

alansaber wrote: post #247

"Our models are more honest" honey the quarterly marketing spin for a ML term has come. Forget "task alignment" now we're going for "truth index". I suppose this is the only way to generate hype when you're selling/releasing the same product over and over again.

When doing some electrical, Opus 4.7 essentially told me to wiggle a wire to see if it was hot or not with my bare hand.

I called it out.

It then gave me one of the most super heartfelt honest and sincere apologies I have ever received.

Glad the safety team was there for me and able to make such an honest model or I would have been very upset about it.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#312

Post by silverlight »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #283
silverlight wrote: post #236

Unfortunately they seem to have straight up broken Claude Code either with this release in the backend or the new CC version. Errors about "can't modify thinking blocks" are bricking long-running sessions: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues?q=is%3Aissu...

Try updating maybe?

I'm on the latest version (2.1.154 as of this comment). Based on the timestamps on those Issues being reported I think it's happening on the latest version.

I'm sure it will get fixed eventually/soon, just annoying to update and have your workflow break.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#313

Post by Fabricio20 »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #283
silverlight wrote: post #236

Unfortunately they seem to have straight up broken Claude Code either with this release in the backend or the new CC version. Errors about "can't modify thinking blocks" are bricking long-running sessions: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues?q=is%3Aissu...

Try updating maybe?

I just installed/upgraded to try out 4.8 and in only 3 messages I hit this bug! Seems something is broken on CC.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#314

Post by knollimar »

vlovich123 wrote: post #257
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last. There's orders of magnitude of low hanging juice to squeeze out of smaller models. It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years (design not certain, probably unlikely). It is far less clear that a 1.2T model will be meaningfully better enough to justify training it. As far as reasoning is con…

Took me a while to find what you were referring to by gram. Arxiv paper from 9 days ago that's not properly indexed by search engines. (G)enerative (R)ecursive re(A)soning (M)odels. They really wanted the acronym. https://arxiv.org/html/2605.19376v1

I prefer GRRM but then that would imply a habit of not actually getting a final result

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#315

Post by [deleted] »

vlovich123 wrote: post #257
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last. There's orders of magnitude of low hanging juice to squeeze out of smaller models. It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years (design not certain, probably unlikely). It is far less clear that a 1.2T model will be meaningfully better enough to justify training it. As far as reasoning is con…

Took me a while to find what you were referring to by gram. Arxiv paper from 9 days ago that's not properly indexed by search engines. (G)enerative (R)ecursive re(A)soning (M)odels. They really wanted the acronym. https://arxiv.org/html/2605.19376v1

[deleted]

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#316

Post by highwaylights »

simonw wrote: post #73

I generated pelicans riding bicycles on both thinking level low and thinking level high: https://gist.github.com/simonw/68560eddb0b268a8417f80ceb7304... The high one is notably better - the bicycle frame is the correct shape, unlike thinking level low. For comparison, here's Opus 4.7: https://gist.github.com/simonw/afcb19addf3f38eb1996e1ebe749c...

Am I allowed to say that pelican's little helmet is adorable? I can't provide a strong computational proof, or even a shred of anecdata...

...but that pelican's little helmet is adorable.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#317

Post by dyates »

vlovich123 wrote: post #257
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last. There's orders of magnitude of low hanging juice to squeeze out of smaller models. It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years (design not certain, probably unlikely). It is far less clear that a 1.2T model will be meaningfully better enough to justify training it. As far as reasoning is con…

Took me a while to find what you were referring to by gram. Arxiv paper from 9 days ago that's not properly indexed by search engines. (G)enerative (R)ecursive re(A)soning (M)odels. They really wanted the acronym. https://arxiv.org/html/2605.19376v1

And to think, we could have had George RR Martins instead.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#318

Post by SoftTalker »

wg0 wrote: post #104

There is a hole in the boat's bottom due to Chinese models. They might not be as good but they are not bad either or at least I had hard time finding any issues with Deepseekv4 Flash and Pro variants. They get their job done sometimes rarely giving up till they are done what they are after. So even for enterprise deployments, as the dust settles down, CFO/CTOs might find out that deploying on an internal cluster of G…

> CFO/CTOs might find out that deploying on an internal cluster of GPUs is far more cheaper and reliable

I think you're right especially if you're someplace that already has a data center, such as a university. Solves a lot of privacy concerns as well.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#319

Post by AnthonBerg »

boc wrote: post #220
carlos-menezes wrote: post #67

I, for lack of a better word, dislike anyone who anthropomorphizes AI.

I see this take, but it's actually helpful to talk to an LLM in human terms; after all, it's how they are trained. If you keep talking to it like it's a rock, it'll run your queries through a different posture and you might get worse outcomes. Worse if you yell at it, it's now in a conflict resolution mode instead of pure utility mode. I think we can be intelligent enough to know we're talking to a pile of fancy rock…

Yes!

The other half of self-interest in being nice is the training and getting better at it.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#320

Post by phainopepla2 »

lordmauve wrote: post #181

Given DeepSWE just blew apart the SWE-Bench Pro benchmark and handed a 14-point lead to GPT-5.5, it looks pretty bad that they've listed SWE-Bench first in the model release and no DeepSWE. Like, this isn't obviously an answer. Or maybe it is, but publish the DeepSWE numbers so we can see for ourselves.

I'm highly skeptical of DeepSWE. It rates GPT-5.4-mini as three times better than deepseek-v4-pro, but every time I use GPT-5.4-mini I find that it completely sucks at following directions.
Post reply on HN