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

If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

jonready.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 534 posts

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#271

Post by written-beyond »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #267
jatora wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other models arent even close except for gpt 5.5. You're dead wrong on that. You read too many benchmarks and/or chinese propaganda. There hasn't been a serious contender in agentic SWE besides OAI and anthropic for a long time, and no chinese model has even reached opus 4.5 performance yet. The moat isnt insurmountable but it is very solid for at least a 12 month lead time. Which is such an insane amount of time in…

Most of HN is stuck in this fantasyland where they insist their local LLM setup is comparable to Opus 4.8 or GPT 5.5. It's like a collective delusion, I've never seen anything like it.

You can get really good results with Chinese models. You're putting Opus and GPT on too high of a pedestal.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#272

Post by skeptic_ai »

vdfs wrote: post #205
Artoooooor wrote: post #91

It is as if Jetbrains told that "you can't use IntelliJ Idea to develop frontier IDE. We can introduce slight compilation errors if we detect you doing so".

It would be runtime errors

That’s too easy. Would be nicer memory leaks, intertwined spaghetti code, time dead bombs, bugs based on time

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#273

Post by dominotw »

HoldOnAMinute wrote: post #172
platinumrad wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing is infinitely valuable.

10 engineers can make a billion dollar company. One Claude can replace 10 engineers. This gets very close to "infinitely valuable", it starts to look like a vertical line to me

> 10 engineers can make a billion dollar company.

this wont be possible by the time its possible. there would be massive deflation. why would i care about 10 engineeers prompts when i can prompt it myself

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#274

Post by ggoo »

jatora wrote: post #264
hedora wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What moat? There are multiple companies providing pareto-optimal frontier models, and it takes O(10) people to build one of these things. The rest is capital intensive, and the price will approach the cost of production over time. Thinking this is a profitable endeavor is equivalent to claiming coal plants have good margins because boilers are expensive.

Other models arent even close except for gpt 5.5. You're dead wrong on that. You read too many benchmarks and/or chinese propaganda. There hasn't been a serious contender in agentic SWE besides OAI and anthropic for a long time, and no chinese model has even reached opus 4.5 performance yet. The moat isnt insurmountable but it is very solid for at least a 12 month lead time. Which is such an insane amount of time in…

I use gpt 5.5 at work (because they pay for it) and DeepSeek at home (because I pay for it) and while I do agree one is better than the other, I think you’re really overstating how far apart they are. Just my take.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#275

Post by SwellJoe »

altcognito wrote: post #224
SwellJoe wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we agree? What moat? You answered yourself: "capital intensive" But, history says the supercomputer of today will fit in your pocket in a few years. They've bought up all the RAM and GPUs, which pushes the capital requirements upward for everyone else. But, they can't corner the market forever, there are too many competing interests. AMD and Intel keep making new GPUs and APUs. The memory makers can't just se…

The other half of the moat is the data they stole from everyone else, some of it illegally. So, be sure they will do everything in their power to stop others from getting that data freely.

Yeah, I think a lot of the "slow down" rumblings we're hearing from OpenAI and Anthropic are really overtures toward regulatory capture; basically, "now that we're in the lead, we need to lock this shit down so nobody else can catch up."

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#276

Post by bigbadfeline »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #267
jatora wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other models arent even close except for gpt 5.5. You're dead wrong on that. You read too many benchmarks and/or chinese propaganda. There hasn't been a serious contender in agentic SWE besides OAI and anthropic for a long time, and no chinese model has even reached opus 4.5 performance yet. The moat isnt insurmountable but it is very solid for at least a 12 month lead time. Which is such an insane amount of time in…

Most of HN is stuck in this fantasyland where they insist their local LLM setup is comparable to Opus 4.8 or GPT 5.5. It's like a collective delusion, I've never seen anything like it.

Some of the new and open models are very capable now, The truth is, the value of the model is in the mind of the user - the big names are impressive to those who know little and are dazed by little, but they are bound to end up wrong regardless of how good the model is.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#277

Post by gck1 »

jatora wrote: post #264
hedora wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What moat? There are multiple companies providing pareto-optimal frontier models, and it takes O(10) people to build one of these things. The rest is capital intensive, and the price will approach the cost of production over time. Thinking this is a profitable endeavor is equivalent to claiming coal plants have good margins because boilers are expensive.

Other models arent even close except for gpt 5.5. You're dead wrong on that. You read too many benchmarks and/or chinese propaganda. There hasn't been a serious contender in agentic SWE besides OAI and anthropic for a long time, and no chinese model has even reached opus 4.5 performance yet. The moat isnt insurmountable but it is very solid for at least a 12 month lead time. Which is such an insane amount of time in…

DeepSeek 4 Pro is performing agentic SWE tasks for me quite well. It can't do everything Opus can do, but if OpenAI and Anthropic disappeared tomorrow, I'd figure out ways to make it work with harness improvements and other optimizations.

Anthropic can stretch the moat all they want, but in the department of trust, they put a final nail in their coffin today. Anthropic is pure evil at this point.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#279

Post by dudisubekti »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #254
SwellJoe wrote: post #77

The moat looks deep today but it's going to become more shallow every year. Training a new model from scratch takes serious resources. Post-training/fine-tuning an existing model, dramatically less. The knowledge for the process was esoteric two years ago, now you can ask a current model (one of several) to walk you through it, while building the tools to do it as you go. Several of my recent weekend projects have be…

The moat is not the model, it's the harness. I wager that's one of the main reasons why Google made Antigravity closed source.

But harness is relatively easy to code yourself?

They're just system prompt composer, with some tool functions that the LLM can invoke. I've vibe coded my own in just one day.

Re: If Claude Fable stops helping you, you'll never know

#280

Post by KennyBlanken »

jsw97 wrote: post #184

Given the high rate of false positives people are reporting for the non-silent cybersecurity, biological, etc., safeguards, there is a strong likelihood that you will encounter silently nerfed behavior even if you are _not_ violating their TOS. Ultimately this will be evident in the way customers / external benchmarkers experience Fable. Hopefully competition will drive future models toward a lower false positive rat…

If a benchmark is affected the model owner will almost certainly tune it, so there will be a game of cat and mouse...

Honestly, wouldn't surprise me if the AI companies try to detect benchmarking. Most hardware companies do...

Post reply on HN