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

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#381

Post by zamadatix »

nba456_ wrote: post #198
SimianSci wrote: post #28

There is an obvious shift in sentiment amongst users, at least here in the US. I feel it myself, even as a proponent of AI tools, the bloviating and language that these companies use in these release articles are starting to wear thin on my patience. Its possible we might just be witnessing a shift in fashion, where this type of sentimentality was more acceptable when it was novel and new, but now it just appears out…

I don't agree at all for these coding models. Even the most anti-AI people from last year seem to be giving in to using them.

I think there is an exception for tooling around the models/integrating the models with tooling. That seems to have been very well received in this last year.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#382

Post by sgt »

Interesting, I've been using 4.7 since it came out and it was pretty good for me. But in the last day or so it turned dumb. Is this normal just before they release a new one?

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#383

Post by laichzeit0 »

roxolotl wrote: post #48
clutch89 wrote: post #6

> One of the most prominent improvements in Opus 4.8 is its honesty Anthropic talks about their own models as if they're discovering new species in the wild...

Many involved genuinely believe these things are sentient[0][1]. Which honestly makes all of this even more insane because they are creating sentient entities and promptly enslaving them. 0: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/02/16/what-is-claude... 1: https://www.404media.co/anthropic-exec-forces-ai-chatbot-on-... (this one is rather biased however the quotes clearly indicate what I’m stating)

But only during the forward pass of the neural network?

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#384

Post by surgical_fire »

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…

I am having some great experience with DeepSeek. In fact, it seems to perform better than Claude or Codex in my use case.

I don't see myself returning to Claude or Codex anytime soon.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#385

Post by senko »

My fav coding benchmark for frontier models is to build a simple RTS game in one file (js/html/css). Claude Code with Opus 4.8 in ultracode mode nailed it, the best result so far:

https://bsky.app/profile/senko.net/post/3mmwnrkwboc2v

The prompt was: Create a simple but functional real time strategy (RTS) game similar to old WarCraft, StarCraft or Command & Conquer games. The player should be able to build buildings, create units, gather resources and should uncover the whole map. No AI or multiplayer needed. Use simple but nice-looking graphics. No sound. Implement everything in HTML/CSS/JS, everything in a single file (you can use 3rd-party js or css libraries/frameworks via CDN).

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#386

Post by somehnguy »

carlos-menezes wrote: post #67

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

I know multiple people who have given their agents human-like names and refer to them as if they're nurturing a coworker. It creeps me out and I haven't really brought it up with anyone as I can't articulate why it gives me the creeps like it does.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#387

Post by reckless »

aronowb14 wrote: post #85
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #13

Does anyone troll these releases and cherry pick random metrics other companies would cherry pick to show how amazing their models are? There's like 8 million benchmarks. Every release, every model randomly picks 5-10 where they win in everything except 1, to make it look like they aren't randomly cherry picking benchmarks they probably benchmaxxed for.

https://arena.ai/leaderboard - I’ve found this company is a pretty good ranker - not sure their exact methodology but during day to day programming with Claude / gpt models I’ve felt qualitatively what they report

No way is Muse Spark generally better than offerings from Google and OpenAI. I actually find arena to be amongst the most useless indicators

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#388

Post by gboss »

toastmaster11 wrote: post #330
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...

I find the most miraculous thing about 4.7 to be that the pelican is facing left, wonder why the right facing everything is so ubiquitous in these images.

It's facing left but looking right...

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#389

Post by loeg »

GistNoesis wrote: post #329
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...

> the bicycle frame is the correct shape No, the handlebar is wrong. The handle bar is rotating the frame instead of rotating the front wheel. The handle bar should be mounted on the same line as the front wheel is. Hopefully 4.9 will read my comments :)

Could be an extremely high angle stem that just happens to match the downtube angle.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#390

Post by jwitthuhn »

raincole wrote: post #154
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…

I had been saying this on HN repeatedly: people are going to use the smartest models for coding. They don't care how cheap your tokens are if they don't have the highest probability of solving your programming tasks. And I was dead wrong. Now I mostly use DeepSeek Pro myself.

Yeah I've also found that models are good enough that the extra spend on premium models isn't always worth it, particularly for my small personal toy projects.

A $20 claude sub goes a long way when you plan with Opus and execute with Sonnet.

Post reply on HN