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

521–530 of 534 posts

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

#521

Post by jpfromlondon »

jatora wrote: post #505
jpfromlondon wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that isn't rational, rational is using the model that can best solve your current problem in the timeliest cost considered manner. I'm not working on the frontier problems, I don't need god-in-a-box for $600 per month.

its not god in a box and its not $600 per month and almost nobody is working on frontier problems. they just want frontier intelligence to solve their given problems in a superior manner. you're minimizing and exaggerating all of the wrong things. cope more i guess - more compute for us!

Your comment makes it pretty clear that mine went over your head and that's fine, these tools are for people like you, godspeed.

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

#522

Post by DrewADesign »

SwellJoe wrote: post #275
altcognito wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

I think they’ve a) increased the hype as much as humanly possible about incremental improvements mixed with regressions, b) know they soon will have to multiply their prices several times when the VC subsidies dry up, and c) will probably still need to partially close the faucet on compute. They’re priming us for a heroic explanation why their service (not models — service) is simultaneously becoming a lot more expensive AND shittier.

“We’ve failed to deliver on 5 years of promises after wasting billions of dollars… sorry” is a death knell. However, “We’ve decided to not deliver on 5 years of promises after wasting billions of dollars… for safety… but keep those investments rolling in” is like crack to the true believers.

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

#523

Post by gopher_space »

thinkingtoilet wrote: post #445
gopher_space wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is software development, not sales. We rely on our tooling. If I’m using a calculator to verify my math, I don’t want to use a second calculator to verify the first one.

Oh come on. All that happens is that it kicks the query to a model that was literally state of the art two days ago. Stop with dramatics.

We're hovering around the point that differentiates software developers from software engineers. If you create tools that people use to e.g. make or receive an income, moral and legal standards require this level of focus and commitment.

Because of this there's a chain of trust between myself and the tools I rely on to do work. The people who create those tools see unpredictability as a problem, and that's the only reason I'm using them. I can't work on important systems with a vendor product like Claude Fable.

That being said there's plenty of work to do where it'd be amazing. This isn't an either/or situation.

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

#524

Post by dannyw »

canada_dry wrote: post #251
torben-friis wrote: post #37

They have a silent nerfing system for their models and say so openly. The obvious question is how much it is being used already. Competitor companies being nerfed? Non Americans getting worse code? Punishing and rewarding users to maximize engagement, like online games do affecting victories through matchmaking?

I re-subscribed to GPT's "PLUS" plan after ditching Anthropic for lack luster results... one of the first coding tasks I gave it resulted in a progress/thinking message that said something to the effect of (it vanished too quickly to get a screen shot unfortunately): Evaluating client value It took me aback. Note: the code had nothing to do with "client value". Behind the scenes it is not hard to imagine OpenAI, Anth…

I wouldn’t over interpret this. It could be a bad summary of “what solution would be more valuable to the user?”

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

#525

Post by sometimelurker »

hypfer wrote: post #359
baq wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nuance is not what they propose, but why, even according to them, they propose this. Honestly the proposals are appalling, but biosafety arguments are not immediately dismissible. Ultimate cyber threats we can handle by rewinding society 50 years back. We can’t undo a novel genetically engineered virus.

I mean arguably, we _could_ create conditions in which it is much less likely for people to start developing such a novel genetically engineered virus. If you think about the factors that lead to people wanting to do such a thing, they're almost always tied to (perceived) inequality, (perceived) injustice or similar in some way. I do believe that we could greatly reduce a whole bunch of such risks by just stopping to…

> ...ch less likely for people to start developing such a novel genetically engineered virus.

only people that would do this would be crazy bc it cant be controled after release.

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

#526

Post by viking123 »

gck1 wrote: post #520
lobocinza wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain why?

It feels to me that Altman became humbler for the lack if a better word? And OpenAI's general communication as of late feels more grounded, much more pleasant than Anthropic comms. They also seem to be focusing on users quite a bit more. Anthropic's communication style feels like I somehow owe them my life or something. This was very different a year ago.

Anthropic comms gives this vibe that Amodei and other goons want to be your dads.

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

#527

Post by hypfer »

sometimelurker wrote: post #525
hypfer wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean arguably, we _could_ create conditions in which it is much less likely for people to start developing such a novel genetically engineered virus. If you think about the factors that lead to people wanting to do such a thing, they're almost always tied to (perceived) inequality, (perceived) injustice or similar in some way. I do believe that we could greatly reduce a whole bunch of such risks by just stopping to…

> ...ch less likely for people to start developing such a novel genetically engineered virus. only people that would do this would be crazy bc it cant be controled after release.

Yes but ethical responsibilities are entirely irrelevant, because that crazy person would still bioweapon you, and you kinda do not want that.

So regardless of if they're evil/bad/crazy or not, you still want to have that not happen. Hence the systemic perspective instead of the focus on the individual.

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

#528

Post by mlyle »

pixl97 wrote: post #489
mlyle wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends upon the intelligence vs compute scaling law— which I think no one really knows. Pretty likely to be some degree of diminishing returns, but how much? Is it logarithmic, inverse quadratic, … If training models gets way cheaper, I would expect the diminishing returns to get steeper too.

And you're right, no one has any clue what the limits of intelligence are. Though to me it seems odd that humanity has reached the pinnacle of it in the last million years or so after a few billion years of lifes development. Just seems improbable we are close to the limits.

I am not making an argument about limits. I just expect some degree of diminishing returns.

A related argument is speed of intelligence vs capability at that speed. You can think of a three way trade off between latency, cost, and capability that is unlikely to be linear in any dimension and that changes in steps as technology or biology evolves.

Ultimately relating to the properties of the computing substrate and almost certainly bounded by some kind of thermodynamic limits that present systems do not approach.

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

#530

Post by port11 »

gck1 wrote: post #383
port11 wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not pretty, but if Anthropic is the E Corp of this timeline, we’re not being creative enough. There’s better targets out there for this comparison.

They're just getting started, and every statement/decision they make becomes more concerning than the previous one. Isn't it concerning that a single company unilaterally decided for the world that they're the ultimate gatekeepers and they decide who gets access to the frontier artifical intelligence and in which capacity? Who elected Amodei to decide which projects get to have the access to a dual-use cyber model an…

Good point. I imagine that other labs also restrict access to frontier models, but less publicly so. Do we know that, say, Gemini lets you develop a competitor product without any safeguards?

In general this appears to be par-for-the-course with tech. Many Google products are notoriously slower or even unusable in Safari and Firefox, but we can't know for sure whether that's due to Chrome optimizations or purposefully wasted code cycles in other browsers.

Post reply on HN