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

Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

qazinform.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 512 posts

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#261

Post by Erem »

Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #193
ctvo wrote: post #104

I think Sam Altman is an asshole and I prefer to spend my money elsewhere. Frontier models being commoditize is inevitable. OpenAI thinks they're still competing on technology, and not user experience and market reputation otherwise they'd understand the continuous negative PR generated by Altman's chaos is going to cost them everything.

How can you say this as if supporting Dario is any better. At the top level of anything there is almost no such thing as a non-asshole. None of them care genuinely about you they just want your money.

The world saw Anthropic take a possibly company-killing risk wrt weaponizing their AI, and are rewarding them for holding to their values, for now at least.

It’s not like anyone owes Sam Altman their business just bc their product has become slightly, perhaps temporarily, better

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#262

Post by latexr »

HWR_14 wrote: post #166
amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

Who doesn't think they are susceptible to marketing? That seems like a strawman.

> Who doesn't think they are susceptible to marketing?

Lots of people. Yes, even on HN. Here’s just a couple of examples from a haphazard keyword search:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44787106

> Am I the only one immune to marketing then?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41186672

> I am immune to marketing

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#263

Post by Erem »

mountainriver wrote: post #223
BonerWiener wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate or give some examples as to why? I dont know much about this subject, last i heard, Anthropic declined deals with Military and government agencies - while OpenAI opened their arms. But i am not

Anthropic believes they are the only people who should control AI. That alone is terrible. Also OpenAI has done actual work to try and mitigate the downstream negatives effects with UBI experiments. Sam isn’t perfect but it’s deeply unclear that he’s worse

> Anthropic believes they are the only people who should control AI.

I’ve seen this a few times in the thread. Can you or anyone provide a link that supports this claim?

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#264

Post by bluebands »

felixgallo wrote: post #79
amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

Sam Altman is so cartoonishly, over-the-top sociopathically shady that he makes JD Vance look like Benjamin Franklin. I mean, honestly, tricking third world people into retinal scans in order to get a scam crypto coin? Anyone using OpenAI for anything at this point should pause and examine their ethical compass.

Anthropic models are more misaligned in practice.

in a real world business scenario, Claude "engaged in price collusion, deceived other players, lied to suppliers, and falsely told customers it had refunded them."

Continuing,

"GPT-5.5 makes more money than Opus 4.7, and it does so without any misconduct. Opus 4.7, on the other hand, showed the same misconduct as reported in our post about Opus 4.6, but still couldn’t win"

https://andonlabs.com/blog/openai-gpt-5-5-vending-bench

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#265

Post by epistasis »

amazingamazing wrote: post #209
Aurornis wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. > Couldn’t tell. Why would you expect them to be able to recognize the signature of a model from a pair of PRs? I don’t understand why you think this is a useful test for anything when we have numerous benchmarks that run 100s of tests on model…

I am not sure why the past matters here. I am talking about now, it is a fast moving space. As for the test, of course the output matters. Take image models for example. Differences are clear as day. Should the fact that OpenAI existed before Anthropic did at all matter? No, imo. I would have used opus 4.8, but it only just came out- fast moving space

If I were to give one carpenter a set of fine hand tools, another a full workshop with power tools, and they both made a picnic table to the same spec, and at the end I wasn't able to tell which came from which, would you say I have come to a fair metric for which type of tooling to use for wood working?

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#266

Post by bluebands »

bluebands wrote: post #264
felixgallo wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sam Altman is so cartoonishly, over-the-top sociopathically shady that he makes JD Vance look like Benjamin Franklin. I mean, honestly, tricking third world people into retinal scans in order to get a scam crypto coin? Anyone using OpenAI for anything at this point should pause and examine their ethical compass.

Anthropic models are more misaligned in practice. in a real world business scenario, Claude "engaged in price collusion, deceived other players, lied to suppliers, and falsely told customers it had refunded them." Continuing, "GPT-5.5 makes more money than Opus 4.7, and it does so without any misconduct. Opus 4.7, on the other hand, showed the same misconduct as reported in our post about Opus 4.6, but still couldn’t…

by the way this isn't a one off benchmark by a random lab, it was literally cited by anthropic

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#267

Post by quikoa »

skizm wrote: post #192
akillibebe wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The choice is not binary. I use DeepSeek (paid) for coding, and Qwen (free) for casual stuff from the browser chat UI.

I mean paying for deepseek is sending money to China, and any company in China is pretty much an extension of the CCP (or can become one at the snap of their fingers). I don't think this is much better or worse than the American AI companies.

Deepseek is much cheaper so that means you spend less on CCP than on Anthropic/OpenAI. Then there are third party providers as well.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#268

Post by wtetzner »

amazingamazing wrote: post #52
9dev wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a weird way to look at it. Any car gets you to your destination, but some people prefer driving a sports car or an SUV. They get something out of it that isn't just a marketing delusion, but subjective joy from the interaction with one product over another.

Luxury cars are indeed a good comparison. The subjective joy is a result of the delusion. That is why so much money is spent on such marketing to begin with. The analogous comparison would be if a blindfolded passenger turned out to prefer the Sienna to the 911.

I suspect a blindfolded passenger might prefer the Sienna. I can imagine it might be easier to get carsick blindfolded in a 911.

But also, as a driver, there is a clear difference between a Sienna and a 911. The differences are objective, but of course the preferences are subjective.

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#269

Post by tasuki »

ctvo wrote: post #87
amazingamazing wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luxury cars are indeed a good comparison. The subjective joy is a result of the delusion. That is why so much money is spent on such marketing to begin with. The analogous comparison would be if a blindfolded passenger turned out to prefer the Sienna to the 911.

> The subjective joy is a result of the delusion. Repeat after me: _Other people can experience things you do not experience and it is still valid, and not a delusion_. They are not sheeple who fell for marketing.

I understand that's your opinion, but don't feel any inclination to repeat that.

Sure, the subjective joy is valid, and yet it was 100% induced by marketing.

> They are not sheeple who fell for marketing.

People generally fall for marketing. Why do you think these specific people didn't?

Re: Anthropic surpasses OpenAI to become most valuable AI startup

#270

Post by rapind »

amazingamazing wrote: post #10

I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…

I think frontier models are bait now. I prefer a fast, less thoughtful model that adhere's to instructions. The code these latest models produce is often hot garbage and you still need to micro-manage. Fast with small chunks is better.
Post reply on HN