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

821–830 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#821

Post by childintime »

oblio wrote: post #774
alex43578 wrote: post #767

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is anything you do on your own? You wrote this response in English, but didn't invent your own language. How dilute of a contribution can someone/something have made and still merit credit?

LOL. Tolkien invented multiple languages. There are/were probably 100 000 languages on this planet. That's without including dialects. We use existing languages not because we love to copy, it's because languages are a medium for communication. They're only useful if they're understood by others. If you wanted to prove a point: writing is much, much harder to invent, yet it was invented independently at least 3 times…

I remember a report a few years back that LLM's(?) started communicating between each other using an internal language, shortcutting most of their serialization. That is language.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#822

Post by tossandthrow »

lucas_the_human wrote: post #820
muldvarp wrote: post #796

Why should I be amazed at something that promises to destroy my life? I genuinely don't understand why people who have to work for their living are amazed at this. It will have a vast negative impact on your life unless you already live off of your wealth.

This is just so negative. How will it destroy your life? There are so many great and useful things it can and will do to improve humanity.

It will only do so if the benefits of the technology is made available to all and we will see alternatives to make an income.

Based on the past 40 years track record it seems unlikely that we will see any form of redistribution before it is existential.

That is definitely grounds for being pessimistic.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#823

Post by kingkawn »

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.

The exhausting worthlessness of all LLM writing is so palpable that we need a new theory of the value of culture that has no relationship to the content. Back to the old Aura of the Artist arguments from the Industrial Revolution

Re: Claude Opus 5

#824

Post by ben_w »

makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

> We should find a way to get "re-sensitized" to what we are witnessing and the pace of it.

We (collectively, there were obviously many exceptions) didn't internalise exponential growth even with the much faster doubling time of COVID-19 before the lockdowns hit. "Oh, it's just flu; wait, why is the supermarket short of hand sanitiser and bulk carbohydrates? Let's blame China and everyone who tells us to wear face masks!"

Same for the slower, but entirely foreseen, rate of climate change. "Who cares, it's just a few degrees, and anyway China's not going to cut emissions; wait why is the sky orange? Let's blame Canada and put tariffs on Chinese cars and PV!"

AI? "Who cares, it's just a stochastic parrot/glorified autocomplete. What's the Jacobin conjecture and why should I care, it's just brute-force."

Still, this is currently spiky intelligence, so I'm hoping some expensive-but-zero-to-few-fatalities catastrophic error forces better practices. An AI analog of the (1940) Tacoma Narrows Bridge (one canine fatality), rather than a repeat of Chernobyl or the (1984) Union Carbide incident in Bhopal (3,787-16k+ dead, ≥558,125 injured).

Re: Claude Opus 5

#825

Post by [deleted] »

HyperL0gi wrote: post #55

Isn’t it just hilarious that a model that seemed so superior to Fable but didn't get doomsay marketing from Anthropic got released without any issues? In theory, this was supposed to be AGI level according to Anthropic, yet here we are, just a normal Friday.

[deleted]

Re: Claude Opus 5

#826

Post by wneje »

makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

I mean I hate to be the one breaking it to you - but the entire US llm industry is liviing in a bubble.

Business Progress is super slow. Doesn’t matter how fast the tech moves. Human orientation into the unknown is difficult and very slow. And with a continually fast changing background - it gets even slower! LOL the great irony.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#827

Post by sam345 »

makaking wrote: post #701

"Opus 5 was given a drawing of a machine part and asked to write code to rebuild it as a 3D FreeCAD model. However, in this task, the model was intentionally given no way to directly view the drawing. Opus 5 responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full machine part." How surreal is it that we are not absolutely jaw-dropped by these types o…

Is this a bot? Sounds like ai

Re: Claude Opus 5

#828

Post by sam345 »

tossandthrow wrote: post #799
muldvarp wrote: post #796

Why should I be amazed at something that promises to destroy my life? I genuinely don't understand why people who have to work for their living are amazed at this. It will have a vast negative impact on your life unless you already live off of your wealth.

Even for people living of wealth, it is not clear what the outcomes are. If renters of your apartments can not afford to rent them, housing crashes because your city was a looser (Detroit style withdrawals). Even for stocks we don't know who the winners are. The market as a whole usually does not respond that well on serious turmoil. So yeah. We are likely seeing some very rough years.

Loser. Loose means opposite of tight.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#829

Post by wneje »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #753
teiferer wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> responded by writing its own computer vision pipeline Was it "its own" or something that was part of its training material? Don't get me wrong, I find this all amazing too and makes my work 10x easier and quicker. But it's not like it's inventing this stuff from scratch / first principles. It has seen this kind of tech before by consuming all publicly available source code and books etc. (And that's ok, but let's b…

> But it's not like it's inventing this stuff from scratch / first principles. It has seen this kind of tech before by consuming all publicly available source code and books etc. (And that's ok, but let's be honest/clear about that.) But how much to emphasize it, and why? Because frankly, you aren't inventing anything from scratch / first principles, either. None of us are, not frequently and not much anyway. We're p…

[flagged]

Re: Claude Opus 5

#830

Post by ben_w »

sam345 wrote: post #828
tossandthrow wrote: post #799

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even for people living of wealth, it is not clear what the outcomes are. If renters of your apartments can not afford to rent them, housing crashes because your city was a looser (Detroit style withdrawals). Even for stocks we don't know who the winners are. The market as a whole usually does not respond that well on serious turmoil. So yeah. We are likely seeing some very rough years.

Loser. Loose means opposite of tight.

Even as a native English speaker, this is one of my more common mistakes, along with weather/whether[/wether].

How did we end up with the word with the long-o having one o, and the word with the short-o having two?

Post reply on HN