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

Claude Opus 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#661

Post by Void_ »

wuhhh wrote: 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.

I tried making a Things clone yesterday.

Spent maybe 7 hours of promoting with Fable.

I wanted to get drag and drop right, and I wanted good code architecture to start with.

It’s using TinyBase for data storage.

Here’s how far I got in 7 hours: https://focuslist.app

Yes, much faster than writing all of that by hand.

But prompting quality software into existence? No way. It would take at least another full time week to finish that app with all the detail I desire.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#663

Post by jnwatson »

Kwpolska wrote: post #464
deet wrote: post #446

I compared the writing style of Opus 5 vs Fable 5, and Opus 5 continues many of the "Claude-isms" of its 4.8 predecessor in a way that Fable broke away from. Opus 5 still uses "carry the argument", "worth stating plainly", ", and the trap", "The X matters more", the use of "move" We need an "annoying English" benchmark. - Fable 5 Max: https://gist.github.com/deet/3d97f854b48eac6658d642fa18bb24d... - Opus 5 Max: https…

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

I recently wrote a short paper with Fable, and, with some prodding, I was able to get some non-painful prose out of it.

I just found my prompt:

The writing style could really use some work. Avoid Claude-isms like "stated fairly", em dashes, "load-bearing", overly punchy phrasing like "keep the signal, govern the response". This is a technical document, not a marketing campaign.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#664

Post by sivakon »

Sol- wrote: post #42

How does it perform on HuggingFaceExploit bench? Suspiciously absent, so not sure if I can take the model seriously. On a serious note, I hope they improved their extremely sabotaging and unspecific bio safeguards, which prevented Fable from being used in any codebase that ever so slightly grazed medical terminology or data and made me switch to 5.6 Sol.

What is HuggingFaceExploit bench?

Re: Claude Opus 5

#665

Post by AussieWog93 »

deet wrote: post #446

I compared the writing style of Opus 5 vs Fable 5, and Opus 5 continues many of the "Claude-isms" of its 4.8 predecessor in a way that Fable broke away from. Opus 5 still uses "carry the argument", "worth stating plainly", ", and the trap", "The X matters more", the use of "move" We need an "annoying English" benchmark. - Fable 5 Max: https://gist.github.com/deet/3d97f854b48eac6658d642fa18bb24d... - Opus 5 Max: https…

I don't understand why Claude sounding like Claude is a bad thing?

What's next - complaining that `make` says "nothing to be done for 'all'"?

Re: Claude Opus 5

#666

Post by vouaobrasil »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #582
deweywsu wrote: post #565

I wish I could just go back to the days before AI and cell phones. The world seemed to move fast then, but it really hadn't yet.

I wish I could just go forward to the world after AI has fulfilled 5% of its promise and everybody is much healthier and single-handedly capable of creating as much value as 1000-person companies used to create.

I actually think the world is a better place when there's at least a bit of scarcity and people can recognize each other for their different talents. A bit of tech is good but when everyone can create endless value in your hypothetical world, people will stop valuing the work of others like they do today.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#667

Post by edg5000 »

leobuskin wrote: post #330
atraac wrote: post #23

Great that there's a new model but they could fix their existing infra. We're considering dropping our Claude Team sub cause it's unusable recently. Constant bugs, dropped sessions, issues switching models, http errors. It's becoming ridiculous

Is it some Claude Team/Enterprise only problematic? I'm using two 20x Max accounts almost non-stop (Fable/Opus) for 1.5 years at this point, zero issues with both client and infra sides (from US and in travels). When I'm reading such messages it feels like either I'm lucky or it's a part of some campaign.

Over the last 1.5 years, they had a few failures with their auth system; two or three times auth failed for a few hours so I could not work. But otherwise they have been just fine. Some issues, but not significant.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#668

Post by novlrdotcom »

abixb wrote: post #180
postalcoder wrote: post #135

I think the most important thing here is not absolute performance. It's that organizations now have access to a Fable-ish model without Fable's 30-day data retention requirement[0]. > "Consistent with prior Opus models, Opus 5 does not have data retention requirements for general access."[1] On the Opus model release page, the reason why Fable doesn't have an ARC-AGI score is because of that retention policy[2]. 0: h…

So the rumors were right, Opus 5 was indeed being polished up for release. Huge improvements in GDPval-AA v2 too -- great for some of the knowledge work-based agentic workloads I run. Also glad they still kepy Fable 5 on "credits only" access. I think we're going to start seeing model providers gate top-of-the-line models behind pay-as-you-go API rates/credits while subsidizing other models on monthly subscriptions.

Does anyone know if Claude Code is on Opus 5 yet? That'd be amazing

Re: Claude Opus 5

#669

Post by zmmmmm »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #665
deet wrote: post #446

I compared the writing style of Opus 5 vs Fable 5, and Opus 5 continues many of the "Claude-isms" of its 4.8 predecessor in a way that Fable broke away from. Opus 5 still uses "carry the argument", "worth stating plainly", ", and the trap", "The X matters more", the use of "move" We need an "annoying English" benchmark. - Fable 5 Max: https://gist.github.com/deet/3d97f854b48eac6658d642fa18bb24d... - Opus 5 Max: https…

I don't understand why Claude sounding like Claude is a bad thing? What's next - complaining that `make` says "nothing to be done for 'all'"?

I'm very happy I can tell when AI wrote something. It keeps everyone honest. I'd be far more concerned if it didn't have a distinct tone and style.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#670

Post by zmmmmm »

Pointless anecdote: I asked it to make some slides and it decided to write its own slide rendering engine:

> On the format — I dropped reveal.js and wrote a small engine inline instead. Reveal would have meant a CDN load, and a deck that half-renders because the lecture theatre wifi is flaky

It one-shotted a perfect functional mini version of powerpoint (or Reveal) for a simple presentation I asked it to make.

Post reply on HN