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

Degraded performance for multiple models

status.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 149 posts

Re: Degraded performance for multiple models

#31

Post by CSMastermind »

sreekanth850 wrote: post #24

Anthropic had really screwed up after 4.6. i don't know if they work to satisfy their ego or for releasing a better model for tasks.

After using Fable more extensively, I've found that it often is lazy or lies or tries to take shortcuts. For a company so sanctimonious about alignment, they seem to be the ones doing the worst at it.

Availability aside they've really made me appreciate OpenAI and cheer for other competitors in the marketplace even if I have mixed feelings about using Chinese models.

Re: Degraded performance for multiple models

#33

Post by gaigalas »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #23
gaigalas wrote: post #14

This age: we made the thing that codes faster before we made the thing that does QA faster.

Nothing new here. Except for the most trivial of bugs, finding and reliably replicating the bug is almost always harder than fixing it.

I lived in a short period of time in which QA was really good. Early Jenkins era, before GitHub. People engineered a lot of ingenious stuff to prevent bugs.

One team I worked with had tests for the product we made ranging from IE6 to IE11, for example. We did demos in-company where people would poke at the products before launch, play with it. When it reached production, it was rock solid stuff. Our motto was "quality is non-negotiable": we were willing to cut scope but never rush things.

I think things changed since then. "Move fast and break things" was a change, and the bill always comes.

Re: Degraded performance for multiple models

#34

Post by echelon »

fny wrote: post #27

Despite the years-long moaning on HN about AWS US East being a single point of failure, we've sold our souls to yet another unstable monolith.

LLMs for coding are new. There are lots of alternatives, and there's a burgeoning open source compliment.

We'll be fine no matter how Anthropic fares.

Re: Degraded performance for multiple models

#40

Post by fellowniusmonk »

sreekanth850 wrote: post #24

Anthropic had really screwed up after 4.6. i don't know if they work to satisfy their ego or for releasing a better model for tasks.

There are whole sections of code work that 4.7+ can't do simply because it is both over fit and stubborn.

God save you if you have a company with narrow but correct technical tradeoffs, because you operate at scale.

Opus from 4.7 one will wreck your code and argue for hours with your engineers.

Certain parts of our company have had to mandate 4.6 and a training doc to explain why our current choice is both the cost efficient and performant one and shouldn't just be ripped out.

Newer models will re-litigate the same bad, known failed architectures over and over again.

Post reply on HN