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

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#901

Post by sandbags »

wavemode wrote: post #889
redbell wrote: post #594

My excitement about Anthropic had fabled-out dramatically when they suspended my pro account about two weeks ago within just 12 hours of fair use. I was really mind-blown when I tried Fable 5 for the first time to help me improve a game I was working on but shortly, they decided that I had a suspicious activity and suspended my account without a clear reason. I submitted a an appeal describing that I am 100% sure I h…

Are you outside the US? And/or are you using VPN? Those are the two things that come to my mind that can cause overzealous security monitoring to flag someone. Another explanation could be the content itself. Does your game have anything at all to do with computer hacking or sexual content? Is there graphic violent language? People commonly report being unable to use AI to work on such things due to guardrails.

As a datapoint: I have routinely been using Claude Code through a VPN for 9 months and am in the UK. I think it has to be more than this. I sometimes shift endpoint mid session and worry I might get flagged. It hasn’t happened yet at least.

I can almost hear the “famous last words”…

Re: Claude Opus 5

#902

Post by naiveter »

btbuildem wrote: post #876
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…

These are relatively easy to nip in the bud with a brief addition to claude.md

What would that addition be?

Re: Claude Opus 5

#904

Post by preg_match »

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.

Yes, these models are very good at writing code but they absolutely suck ass at prose. The prose is annoying and repetitive. At least we only have to deal with it in prompting if you're writing code.

Oh, and comments. You have to do a good amount of prompting to not get shitty 10-line-long comments everywhere.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#905

Post by consensus1 »

andy_ppp wrote: post #873
mlcrypto wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I genuinely don't understand why people who have to work for their living are amazed at this." Also said after seeing the printing press, automobile, calculator, etc for the first time

My god, the printing press was invented in 1440 when most people were living in abject poverty - it took until after WW2 for humans to demand a more shared amount of money between rich and poor. If you think technology delivers improvements in living standards rather than all working people demanding better conditions you’re living in an absolute fantasy and do not understand history at all. I honestly can’t believe…

It does and has done so consistently throughout human history, so I do not believe this will be any different. I couldn't care less what the shared amount of money is because it some billionaire gets another million and I get a thousand, that means I win regardless of whether or not that increases the wealth differential.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#906

Post by LoganDark »

dingaling wrote: post #730
LoganDark wrote: post #272

These cybersecurity safeguards are really annoying. There are ethical reasons to reverse-engineer and binary-patch software; for example Rewind got acquired by facebook and, as a gift to all their customers, implemented a killswitch in their software to ensure it will eventually stop functioning. I kept using a version without the killswitch, but the macOS 27 update killed it, and I needed binary patching to fix it.…

You don't need AI to patch binaries, people have been doing it by hand for decades. It's this accelerating reliance on AI to do 'hard boring things' that really concerns me; it's now passed the tipping point and people are saying that anything slightly esoteric is impossible without AI. I can guarantee that if you spend an afternoon shifting through binary grot with a hex editor you'll have a real sense of accomplish…

> You don't need AI to patch binaries, people have been doing it by hand for decades.

True, but it takes a while to grow the skillset and I needed something quickly.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#907

Post by tarpitt »

slibhb wrote: post #894
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.

If my earning ability is harmed by AI, so be it. There's more to life than how much I earn, and opposing the spread of technology to maximize my earnings is bad.

If your earning ability is eliminated due to AI and you can't survive off of welfare or savings there will not be much more to your life other than starving to death.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#908

Post by steve_taylor »

yesitcan wrote: post #581
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…

And this is the most important observation in this thread. It’s load-bearing!

You're absolutely right. Your belt-and-braces are earning their keep.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#909

Post by scotty79 »

ulfw wrote: post #898
slibhb wrote: post #894

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If my earning ability is harmed by AI, so be it. There's more to life than how much I earn, and opposing the spread of technology to maximize my earnings is bad.

So you rather be poor and talk to ChatGPT than rich and live a normal life?

Would you rather be poor in XXI century or rich in XIII? Are you rich in "normal" life? Hint: If you sell the time of your life for money you are not rich.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#910

Post by UltraSane »

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.

How will it destroy your life?
Post reply on HN