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

Claude Sonnet 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 822 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#771

Post by kingnothing »

sparkling wrote: post #592
nozzlegear wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have been moving more and more to K2.7 Code and GLM-5.2 the last few weeks. They are often good enough for assistance, very fast, and cheap. I've moved completely to local models that I run with my M1 Mac Studio (64gb ram) some time ago. But for the rare times when I feel the local, quantized Qwen3.6 isn't enough, I just connect to Openrouter and use something like Kimi, GLM or Deepseek for a fraction of the pric…

What is your motivation? Privacy and/or data protection? I currently don't see a world where it makes sense to run a local model that will eats up 60% of my RAM, 20-30% of my disk space while providing worse quality output than a $20/month subscription.

You can let a local LLM run loops all night or all weekend and it costs nothing. It works offline. There's no rate limits. Privacy. You aren't tied to the whims of the US Government banning models. You can tie it in to HomeAssistant for home automation tasks very easily.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#772

Post by everforward »

overgard wrote: post #757
everforward wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm thinking the future of this tech will likely be better tooling with better IDE integrations rather than "Claude plz make me a SaaS kthx" I think this sort of thinking is a trap, because it presumes that all software has the same constraints. There's a spectrum of requirements between "chuck this over the wall at Claude, it only has to work once" and "this is a literal rocket ship, formally verify the whole thin…

Yeah I mean, there are definitely little scripts and stuff in my codebase that I'm happy to have an AI spit out and never look at because it's not important; but those are nice wins around the margins, not a justification of the "EVERYTHING HAS CHANGED!" insanity we've been seeing these past couple of years. The thing is though, for that purpose, AI is just an incremental improvement. I mean, in the 80s and 90s peopl…

I do think it’s a step function improvement, as someone that enjoys those crappy but infinitely-useful tools.

Those tools tend to suck in the sense that they were written for a single person, so the tool assumes that you wrote it and have the context of the author. Help text output often sucks, the UI often sucks or doesn’t exist, it might require 15 packages to be installed that no one has documented because it was never meant to be distributed.

I like it as an MVP thing to trial whether other people would use it and I need to write a “real” version of it, or if I’m the only one that will use it and I can just vibe-code the hell out of it permanently.

You used to have to decide that pretty early on, which meant a lot of talking to other people but also trying to prevent it spinning into a whole project with a PM that will never actually be done.

Dunno, ymmv, I like it a lot in the domain of “stuff that doesn’t have an oncall rotation”. I do find it super useful in that space. Still useful but much less so if the code is something I could be paged for.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#773

Post by vidarh »

vidarh wrote: post #633
jimbo808 wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're actively trying to use lobbying power to make open weight models illegal. So I'm just not going to use their services at all anymore. I don't think they're a net gain if you're a skilled senior, and the hidden cost in terms of technical debt and skill atrophy is just being swept under the rug. I'll be okay without their bullshit generator.

> I don't think they're a net gain if you're a skilled senior I've had Claude Code running a /loop for the last week driving down complex crashing bugs in a prototype compiler entirely unilaterally. I occasionally glance over. A few of those crashing test cases were ones I've spent more than a week trying to track down myself. I have 30 years of experience of doing this. It's worked 24/7. So far it has fixed over 500…

Btw, since this morning it's fixed another 200+ crashing test cases.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#774

Post by lubujackson »

keeda wrote: post #253
everforward wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no way to justify their valuations if they get downgraded to a pair programming tool. They need fully agentic stuff to work and replace human engineers to even come close. Offhand, I’m not even certain whether a model like that could justify the constant retraining we’re doing on the agentic models. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to spend millions or billions on training to reduce hallucinations by 0.3% if yo…

Some napkin math -- total global labor compensation is about 50% of the GDP, which puts it in the USD 50 - 60 Trillion range: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/labor-share-of-gdp This source claims that knowledge workers alone (probably because they are paid much more) account for 35 - 50 Trillion of that: https://github.com/danielmiessler/Substrate/blob/main/Data/K... If LLMs can boost their productivity even by an…

This assumes the hand-wavvy "production" of knowledge workers translates directly and equally into money. Making a CEO 5% more productive might mean a billion dollars or it might mean nothing. Making a developer 5% more productive might mean the app gets finished faster or some more tickets are closed, but certainly direct monetary relationship between "work done" and "money made", especially if the knowledge work being optimized is, across the board, more of the busy work ("known-knowns") and not the "what should our new product line be" that tends to move the needle in spurts.

If you are a software contractor, yes more productivity turns directly into money. But it is the same for all other contractors, so there is no gain there either. This is really a structural transformation that crosses industry boundaries, not unlike when we all got on the internet. All I know from living through that is certain changes are obvious even if they take a decade (there will be more AI and more deeply integrated in our lives) but most of the secondary effects are unknowable.

If living through the dot com era taught me anything is that transformative tech routes around walled gardens (i.e. AOL/Prodigy) which is bad news for Anthropic/OpenAI. The wild west that comes after is a window of opportunity for founders but investors will overcommit early (like now) and undercommit when the dust is settled (post bubble).

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#775

Post by Applejinx »

polynomial wrote: post #768
sejje wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least we quit with the "i asked it this question and here's what it said" comments. They were truly awful for the first 6 months or so. Or the "I have my own personal benchmark..." "Claude and its political bias thinks the supreme court should..."

If a conscious model is born here, it should automatically be a (US) citizen.

Oh, 3/5ths of a citizen, surely.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#776

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

rdudek wrote: post #589
Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a senior skilled developer and I find Anthropic $20 + Open AI $20 + OpenCode Go $10 offers more value than $100 on any particular service. Juggling between all different models/agents is quite simple with Zed. A caution about OpenCode Go though, the entire company seems to be run by AI so there's lot of billing related issues with zero support. I subscribe new every month as I lost money due to double payment wit…

Would love to read that blog post. I'm toying with running local AI model with Claude and GLM as well depending on a task. Pretty decent success but it could be better.

Here's the blog - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48748443 .

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#777

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

ido wrote: post #584
Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a senior skilled developer and I find Anthropic $20 + Open AI $20 + OpenCode Go $10 offers more value than $100 on any particular service. Juggling between all different models/agents is quite simple with Zed. A caution about OpenCode Go though, the entire company seems to be run by AI so there's lot of billing related issues with zero support. I subscribe new every month as I lost money due to double payment wit…

I’m interested!

I've posted in another comment above.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#778

Post by Abishek_Muthian »

kamaal wrote: post #580
Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a senior skilled developer and I find Anthropic $20 + Open AI $20 + OpenCode Go $10 offers more value than $100 on any particular service. Juggling between all different models/agents is quite simple with Zed. A caution about OpenCode Go though, the entire company seems to be run by AI so there's lot of billing related issues with zero support. I subscribe new every month as I lost money due to double payment wit…

>>For non coding related tasks I use local models. What sort of hardware are you using to run local models? And how do you use them?

4090 RTX laptop and a M4 Mac Mini, I've posted more information in my blog mentioned in another comment.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#779

Post by fouc »

jamesrcole wrote: post #707
Traubenfuchs wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Completely different results as LLM is non-deterministic. You'd need to produce this like 20 times by each model and then do 2x20x20 cross comparisons by both models and ultimately distill the 2x20x20 comparison results into two reports of how they differ. In this non deterministic computing future, everything else is voodoo, feelings and "vibes".

I would expect a model's result each time to be of a similar quality to the other times. There's something wrong if it does a way better or worse job, at the same problem, sometimes. It's possible, but I haven't heard anyone saying that they do.

probably depends a lot on the temperature setting, lower it is, the more similar the quality perhaps. the higher it is the more variance.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#780

Post by throwaway27448 »

boc wrote: post #608
throwaway27448 wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you really found claude to much more more capable than eg deepseek? Anthropic has little to no chance of producing a competitive business model in the long term.

> Anthropic has little to no chance of producing a competitive business model in the long term. Extraordinary thing to say about the fastest growing company in the history of capitalism. They will soon have access to public markets, essentially unlimited capital, and can build insanely large models that they don't have to make public... ever. They can just use those models to run their business, train better models,…

We both know that both revenue and especially valuation, especially for something with as little moat as software, can vanish overnight. This is a commodity market and anthropic is serving boutique software, and the market gets more crowded every day.
Post reply on HN