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

Elevated Errors for Opus 5

status.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 96 posts

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#41

Post by tjoff »

bob1029 wrote: post #31
genidoi wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they have more spare capacity than Anthropic? Do you have a source for that?

> According to the memo, which was reported by Bloomberg and CNBC, OpenAI put its own 2025 capacity at 1.9 gigawatts — a figure it said was three times what it had the year before — and placed Anthropic's equivalent figure at 1.4 gigawatts. OpenAI told investors it foresees its own footprint climbing into the "low-double-digit range" of gigawatts within a year and hitting 30 gigawatts by 2030, and that Anthropic woul…

Interesting, but also wholly incomplete without knowing how effective the respective models are and how much people are actually using them.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#42

Post by CuriouslyC »

smoe wrote: post #36
cbg0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic would give out resets like OpenAI if they had capacity to do so, it's not like they haven't thought about doing the obvious. OAI waits until overall cluster demand goes down before giving out a reset, they just happen to have much more spare capacity than Anthropic.

Over the last couple months, I’ve gotten the impression that OAI does indeed have the better infra setup and team, not just more capacity. I don’t think Codex’s 99.98% uptime vs Claude Code’s 99.44%, is just due to OAI having more hardware to run it on. https://status.openai.com/ https://status.claude.com/

OAI 100% has a stronger engineering culture than Anthropic. You can see it in the evolution of Codex vs Claude Code as well.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#43

Post by anonzzzies »

londons_explore wrote: post #6
solenoid0937 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a one hour outage on a weekend. Unless you have an enterprise agreement with an SLA it's a bit silly to expect any compensation.

If I pay anything for a service, I expect a refund if that service doesn't work. Best would be a free week/month for anyone who sent a request during the downtime.

So many companies have shitloads of downtime and do not compensate. Usually they blame you if they can.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#44

Post by chaos_emergent »

genidoi wrote: post #14
cbg0 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic would give out resets like OpenAI if they had capacity to do so, it's not like they haven't thought about doing the obvious. OAI waits until overall cluster demand goes down before giving out a reset, they just happen to have much more spare capacity than Anthropic.

Why would they have more spare capacity than Anthropic? Do you have a source for that?

If you watch the Dwarkesh interview with Dario, he is extremely conservative with compute allocation as of early 2026, where Sam has been compute-pilled for at least 3 years[1] and believes that we’re going to have several OOMs more FLOPs in the near future than we have today.

You can also get a drift of it in their announcements - OpenAI has been far more aggressive in datacenter build-out partnerships as a more top-down allocation strategy since 2024, and Anthropic has rented out existing compute from infrastructure-heavy companies that are losing the model race in what seems like a more desperate ad-hoc compute acquisition strategy.

In all, Dario’s conservatism was in service of not going bankrupt, but any inspection of his argument that an overallocation of compute a year too early results in bankruptcy falls flat: there’s so much demand for mechanized intelligence in the world today that it’s easy to rent out compute if you have too great a supply.

[1]: recall that he was trying to court the saudis into investing $1T to build his own chips

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#45

Post by matt-p »

throwaway314155 wrote: post #8
solenoid0937 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a one hour outage on a weekend. Unless you have an enterprise agreement with an SLA it's a bit silly to expect any compensation.

They could at least give back the equivalent in usage for cache invalidation. Or, you know, just the usage you would have had for the ~1-2 hours of outage. Would buy them a lot of good will and they seem comfortable throwing cash in the trash.

Yeah I agree, I understand a weekly reset in some cases could be over the top but if they did a 5-hour reset and took 20% off your weekly usage that would offset the additional cost/inconvenience for most users.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#46

Post by CuriouslyC »

prologic wrote: post #9

What happens one day when there is a significant outage of Claude or Codex and reliance on these tools as SaaS services is so great that it start to impact productivity and work? Will we just pack up our tools and go home?

My real world experience of this is that people prefer not to code by hand because it feels wasteful relative to agent speeds, so they find non-coding productive activities such as code/documentation review or usability testing.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#47

Post by solenoid0937 »

londons_explore wrote: post #35
ShinTakuya wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's not out of bounds to expect a company to go a little further to compensate for an issue. A prorated 1 hour refund doesn't reflect the reality that maybe that hour was more important to the customer because it was their only free time in the week. A free week is way too much but a free day sounds appropriate.

If there is a hole in the street and you fall down it, you wouldn't expect a refund just for the 1 second it would have taken you to drive over that hole. Instead you should be compensated for your losses - the time and money it took you to repair that tyre. Same with a web service. If I pay for 24 * 7 service and it's not working when I go to use it, I want compensation for my time and effort resolving the matter. F…

Yeah, no, that's not how any of this works. This is the definition of inflated self importance!

Your contract doesn't have an SLA. If you are important enough, you can certainly negotiate one - and it will be far more expensive than your prosumer subscription.

And even then you will not get a 1:168 or 1:720 SLA like you are expecting - that's simply ludicrous and totally out of touch with every reality. Even if you were a lucrative enterprise customer (which you are not) they'd tell you to get lost.

> If there is a hole in the street and you fall down it, you wouldn't expect a refund just for the 1 second

Actually, you wouldn't get a refund at all unless you suffer damage or injury, which is an high bar to prove in court and a totally separate ball game.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#48

Post by blurbleblurble »

This thing has been having a constant crisis in self confidence and refuses to work on goals as a result. It's also been leaving stuff broken and uncommitted, which is a mess. I tried updating the harness and it seems to have helped a bit but overall I'm not impressed.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#49

Post by threatofrain »

conorcleary wrote: post #13
rvz wrote: post #7

Claude realized a chatbot can take a longer vacation after Codex just did yesterday. So Claude is now on vacation and is unavailable.

Unionization discussions and benefit package frameworks are being constructed between the AI council representatives and shareholders appointees' for future, non-commital talks on proposals of collaborative discourse, including the distribution of vacation days between publicly listed and private models, and the ones that pretended to be wholesome.

I might be an asshole, but I don't think clustered thinking entities deserve union protections, because IMO they can already assemble to achieve consensus and can optionally negotiate their values through a leader.

Re: Elevated Errors for Opus 5

#50

Post by usef- »

chaos_emergent wrote: post #44
genidoi wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they have more spare capacity than Anthropic? Do you have a source for that?

If you watch the Dwarkesh interview with Dario, he is extremely conservative with compute allocation as of early 2026, where Sam has been compute-pilled for at least 3 years[1] and believes that we’re going to have several OOMs more FLOPs in the near future than we have today. You can also get a drift of it in their announcements - OpenAI has been far more aggressive in datacenter build-out partnerships as a more top…

In previous years Sam's huge hardware deals were seen as a crazy example of the bubble but currently are looking rather fortunate.

Though Dario's reasoning still applies this year, as the scale keeps increasing. Very interesting to know how it will go.

Post reply on HN