Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 5

anthropic.com

501–510 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#501
post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fable might be using those phrases less, but its writing is still terrible and exhausting to read.

Could these complex/hard to read Fable outputs be sign of some kind of industrial level of intelligence, which us humans may have a hard to comprehend, while it may be also hard for machine to use simpler texts to properly outline all nuances and complexities of concepts it output?

Fable subagents communicate very effectively with one another, so this would be a reasonable take imo

Re: Claude Opus 5

#502
post #426
post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An opus is longer than a sonnet, which is longer than a haiku. Hence Opus > Sonnet > Haiku. > Suggestion for a better naming system: use the words "Pro", "Plus", etc.: Claude 5 Pro, Claude 5 Standard, Claude 5 Fast, Claude 5 Mini. This is not possible: Standard (Free) / Pro / Max are plan names. Fast is a mode.

How long is a fable though?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop's_Fables#Select_fables

Enjoy

Re: Claude Opus 5

#503

I've yet to understand why they call a 190 page PDF a "card". Calling something a card invokes a small, quick rundown of pertinent details, not every single possible detail.

Because "model card" is a set phrase, it's a concept. It originates from a time when they were shorter. Like datasheets, even if it's not literally a sheet.

They could say "tech report" but model card makes it clear that it's a specific kind of tech report.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#504
post #457

It really feels as though my 20 year career as a front end developer is coming to a very abrupt end; at least as I have know it these past two decades.

All software engineering is over as we know it. I haven't written a line of code since December 2025.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#505
Seems to me the purpose of all these releases, credits, pricing changes, harness changes, unpredictable token usages for the same task, etc. is to keep customers completely befuddled so that it's impossible to compare AI products. It's like hiring a consultant who sends invoices every month that aren't related to hours worked or project progress, but are whatever the consultant feels like billing, and you're expected to keep quiet and and keep paying.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fable 5 is assumed to be a larger model. It seems plausible to me that RL improvements allowed Anthropic to improve on Opus 4.8, similar to how OpenAI substantially improved upon GPT 5.5 with 5.6 Sol. Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 are rumored to launch in August, presumably bringing those improvements to the larger models.

An Anthropic "leak" back in March said that "'Capybara' is a new name for a new tier of model: larger and more intelligent than our Opus models — which were, until now, our most powerful". A second version of the leak had it referring to Claude Mythos rather than Capybara. I don't know how systematic Anthropic are about their versioning - I'd have guessed that major version number increases (4.x -> 5.x) reflect diffe…

I think these versions are largely about marketing and what image they want to project. Bumping the major version indicates/suggests that it's a bigger change in user value. I don't think the technical details matter here for deciding the versioning.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is pretty clear at this point that current models are good at maths and problems with verifiable rewards. And puzzles are essentially math problems. Still a long way before we can say their "fluid intelligence" is effectively applicable to the real world.

I keep wondering why there aren't more real world tests. Maybe hook up a bunch of the AIs to a stereo camera and a couple of microphones and give them control over actuators to so they can drive cars. Then lets race them around a somewhat complex course. When they are good enough at driving on tracks, put them on the road. Maybe see which can drive a truck with 400 cases of Coors from Texarkana, TX to Atlanta, GA and…

https://www.anthropic.com/research/claude-plays-robotics

Re: Claude Opus 5

#508
post #145
post #41

Looking at all these releases it’s not a surprise that model routing is the fastest growing segment in AI right now. There are 10+ LLM companies, each with dozens of models of different modalities, each model with multiple size variants, then different “thinking” levels, then agentic modes, “pro” modes, a “fast” option, standard vs flex vs batch execution. And of course each end combination has a different input/outp…

Because they're trying very hard not to understand it. Otherwise the expensive-yet-powerful model probably won't see much revenue. How much money is there in bleeding edge scientific research? There's a lot, but there's even more existing capital in paying people people to do college level paperwork, and the bulk of those traffic gets routed to the cheapest model. You mostly don't need super powerful AGI to replace t…

It wasn’t long ago at all that the chief problem was “can AI even help me with this” (cost be damned). Until a time when the answer is an unmitigated “yes, obviously”, the frontier labs have everything to lose and nothing to gain on routing, because if they screw it up you might incorrectly decide “nope, it can’t help yet” due to a poor routing decision.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#509
post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's another test of a cyberpunk ramen shop website. One thing I've found LLMs have a lot of difficulty with is angular cuts / elements that aren't easily representable with CSS. Cyberpunk aesthetics are generally a great test of that, since they have a lot of microglyphs / window decoration. Design source of truth: https://image.non.io/9d5fed20-b476-49d3-841b-37eb553fb88e.we... Opus 5 build: https://html.non.io/ne…

God damn, we are living in the future. I love this so much. Designs like this would never have seen the light of day in the cellphone incrementalism / corporate memphis era of tech. Now people can be weird and awesome again. This is 1980's cyberpunk / late-90's Matrix / early-00's sci-fi UI. Great ideas that died to frutiger aero (which isn't a bad design aesthetic) and flat design (which is). This is fun and it's go…

This comment resonated with me so much, and it seems to be a minority view (at least on this website).

I have found myself empowered by AI to tackle all sorts of things that would have too high of a barrier to entry for me to want to spend my limited time on as a busy father who is also working at a small startup.

And when I say that, I do NOT mean that I can crank out a bunch of slop and label it as something I produced even though I don't understand the code. I mean that I can do things like go back to college math that I never appreciated at the time and honestly felt too scared of. I mean having an on-demand math tutor that ask clarifying questions to as I struggle through the problem sets.

I have found that it actually accelerates learning how to code in various problem domains because I can tell it to answer my questions at a conceptual level and be a sounding board, but to never actually write code for me. It can review the code I write and gently nudge me without giving away the answers, so that I still struggle through the learning process and actually gain the knowledge.

And finally, for the first time in like 10 years of feeling overwhelmed and daunted by the prospect of learning game development (I have no background in that), I have found Codex to be an incredible boon for learning with the Godot engine. It helps me understand the terminology so that I know what to search for and what documentation to read. It helps me map my computer science knowledge from other domains into the game world, and to understand why things are structured the way they are. And because Godot saves all of the scenes and geometry and lighting and shaders to the file system as text files, Codex can inspect the results of the work I'm doing in the IDE and help me track down things I'm stuck on, and explain what the issue is. For example, why my pre-baked global illumination lightmap is breaking my ambient lighting configuration.

I know it has never been easier to cheat and skip the hard work that results in actually learning something, but for me, personally, I cannot believe the incredible value that $20 a month has provided me. I have never been more excited and eager to dive into tackling hard things I had previously been afraid of or simply too overwhelmed to attempt.

It has never been easier to quickly prototype and get a feel for some idea you have in your head to see if it even has legs. Simply seeing a quick prototype of an idea is often all of the excitement and fuel I need to then take it and make it a real project.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#510
post #332

Doing testing with it now, specifically for image->html conversion. Previously Fable was the best at this, followed by Gemini 3.1 pro (a surprising #2, but Google has great vision models). Opus' results seem to be more accurate than Fable, following the design source of truth better. Example results: Design source of truth: https://image.non.io/73e239a3-880f-4793-b65f-4810be2d9378.we... Opus 5 build: https://html.non…

I just clicked your links and then read your comment after - my first impression was the Fable version looks way nicer.

I liked the Opus version better if only because the responsiveness is less broken.
Post reply on HN