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

Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 740 posts

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#451

Post by porridgeraisin »

bonesss wrote: post #427
krupan wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bubble is based on the promise that these LLMs will cure cancer and find the solution to global warming. The pragmatic users of these tools (like you seem to be) are enjoying the subsidized use of the tools right now, but it's not a sustainable business model

Sam Altman says a lot of crazy stuff, but I don’t think that is where the ‘bubble’ is coming from. In recent months we’ve had the first automated unmanned amphibious assault, the daily drone count in our hot wars is jumping by leaps and bounds, and arms suppliers are promising future drone shipments in the hundred thousand unit range. The ten year picture for reactive combined swarm intelligence on the battlefield is…

Sam altman himself has sort of cooled that rhetoric down - see his recent podcast (frankly I forgot who it was with, I only saw clips of it - but he was wearing orange-brown and had an applovin mug). Maybe it is to contrast against anthropic where they are leaning hard into the EA party line, not sure. This guy always seems to have an ulterior motive behind everything though.

One line I remember was that he said the disruption is not happening the way they thought after GPT4 due to inertia bla bla and that it will be slower gradual change and they got the timelines wrong.

And yes on the defense usecase. That is the main reason governments are giving a hoot about AI. Orbital datacenters too, I know people working on the Indian one, it's entirely for defense usecases. Basically for missile stuff.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#452

Post by nicce »

pmdr wrote: post #392
a11r wrote: post #245

There is a difference between needing frontier capability because one is solving a truly open ended problem, and needing a reliable workhorse model to do something well understood. Local models (like Qwen 3.8 27B) have gotten so good that they can do all routine tasks at a fraction of the cost of frontier models.

That model costing $3/M output tokens on Openrouter is a mystery to me.

32GB GPUs are getting expensive so that also affects the price.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#453

Post by pell »

Petersipoi wrote: post #248
rob wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Anthropic does this, OpenAI Is giving everybody resets like every other day now on Twitter. I'm strongly considering biting the bullet and just ditching my $200/month Claude Code plan for the Codex one instead, especially because I keep running into my weekly limits (even sticking to Opus.)

I ditched Claude Code $200/month a couple of months ago in favor of Codex $200/month. The value is night and day. 1. No 5 hour usage limit 2. Weekly usage gets reset CONSTANTLY. It's crazy. The longest I've ever seen it go without a reset is maybe 5 days? 3. I don't feel like OpenAI is constantly trying to fuck with me. Unlike Anthropic. I would way rather have Sol all day every data, consistently, than a slightly be…

>I would way rather have Sol all day every data, consistently, than a slightly better Fable for like, 1 prompt every 5 hours, and only when Anthropic decides to not treat me like a cyber criminal.

I have used Fable heavily on the lower Max plan and you are really exaggerating the limits here. I've had many multi-hour sessions with Fable on Max.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#454

Post by ayewo »

andrekandre wrote: post #422
hardolaf wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also made Fable no longer ZDR for businesses which killed tons of demand for it.

what could be the rationale for that...?

They want to be able to zoom in and zoom out as needed while analyzing aggregated user requests to better understand the different kinds of ways (well-resourced) actors use to distill their most capable models.

> "The data will help us defend against complex and novel attacks (including new jailbreaks and attacks that operate across many requests) as well as help us identify and reduce false positives."

From: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-fable-5-mythos-5

> "Some attacks only become visible across multiple requests. Best-of-N jailbreaking, for example, sends hundreds of slight variations of a prompt in the hope that one will work. Larger patterns of misuse, such as state-sponsored espionage or data extortion campaigns, only surface when our safeguards classifiers can zoom out across many requests. Detecting these threats requires temporarily retaining prompts and outputs so they can be analyzed together, rather than one at a time."

From: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15425996-data-retenti...

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#455

Post by sarjann »

a1371 wrote: post #113

Where Anthropic f'ed up was treating their monetization the way they treat model training. Turns out that success in experimentation is not transferrable. They have tried to find the highest that the market pays for sota models; however, on the consumer side, this is just too confusing and unsettling: "You can only use Fable for a week as a part of your plan" "Be ready! You have to start paying per token!" "Nevermind…

I think an important part is communication, so many of these issue could be fixed by saying "Hey we're seeing our utilisation go over x% over the weekdays so we need to implement "surge usage" during this period starting in 2 weeks.

Instead often it feels like they make a change, then wait for someone to figure it out. Then Anthropic ends up being reactive as opposed to proactive in communication.

It is kind of funny because surprises from OpenAI tends to be positive (Tibo resets), on the Anthropc side I dread them.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#456

Post by kakacik »

gehsty wrote: post #408
foxylad wrote: post #301

Non-LLM user here. Why? Apart from the ecological issues, I'm very uncomfortable giving my organisation's crown jewels to {random_internet__corp}. Look at the lengths they go to for training data - 10M for Spirit's call logs? Destroying millions of obscure books to scan them? They make meth-heads look scrupulous. Your prompts, especially if they contain your entire codebase, are _way_ more data-rich than an airline p…

I’m not certain of that - I feel like the enterprise zero retention policy will be tight?

I think the lure to have/keep an edge at all costs to keep those stock prices high is too big to ignore. They can then pick up costs after series of trials down the line, money and bonuses are now.

MS ain't some altruistic company having core mission the good of humanity, as they proven across decades.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#458

Post by petesergeant »

nl wrote: post #295

Wow the sentiment here is so negative. I'm on the $200 plan (work pays) and I also have the $20 OpenAI plan (I pay) and keep a balance on OpenRouter. There is nothing as good as Fable, not even close. I recently had it run a 18 hour autonomous rebuild of a project (moving from Spark to Pandas for performance/data size trade off issues). It orchestrated Opus sub-agents flawlessly for 18 hours. It even did a great job…

> There is nothing as good as Fable, not even close.

This is true, but only for certain tasks. Even as a Fable fanboi, Sol is much better at Fable for some non-programming tasks: Fable for life-planning tasks is miserable because it keeps adjudicating rules, where I've found Sol to be insightful and warm (characteristics I'd previously associated with Anthropic models).

We're probably less than a year away from all the frontier models being so good at everything for day-to-day use that it doesn't really matter which you use, which is going to seriously fuck up the business models of all of these companies except the infra companies.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#459

Post by vikramkr »

dexterlagan wrote: post #419
a1371 wrote: post #113

Where Anthropic f'ed up was treating their monetization the way they treat model training. Turns out that success in experimentation is not transferrable. They have tried to find the highest that the market pays for sota models; however, on the consumer side, this is just too confusing and unsettling: "You can only use Fable for a week as a part of your plan" "Be ready! You have to start paying per token!" "Nevermind…

They haven't communicated well the fact that the default model should be Sonnet 5, which should give you unlimited use for common coding tasks (say with occasional subagents use) on the Pro plan. Instead they're pushing Opus and even Fable, to try and get people addicted to the higher tier, without realizing that nearly everybody has a Sonnet for peanuts via DeepSeek V4 on OpenRouter, or completely free through Qwen…

Sonnet 5 is a trash model and stupidly expensive if you accidentally set reasoning tokens high - more expensive than fable - it absolutely should not be the default lmao. If the common coding tasks you use ai for is doable with sonnet or local qwen - you're either not using Claude code (if you are, you'll very quickly see that sonnet 5 in Claude code is not a model for "occasional subagent use" - spinning up subagents is the only thing it's good at and it does it way too much. It can spin up subagents and waste huge amounts of tokens but it can't write good code lol.) or you've got Claude code workflow that is very human in the loop where you are significantly steering and controlling the models. And in that case your default should be to use gpt. Claude models are stupid slow.

Re: Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

#460

Post by byzantinegene »

deadbabe wrote: post #39
jamiek88 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right? If we’ve already reached ‘good enough’ then there’s rough waters ahead.

For Anthropic. But not for the AI industry at large. Cheaper, more powerful AI will continue to expand the bubble. Projects will get more ambitious. Everyone will build out their own custom little software. Code diversity expands and requires even more AI.

most of the bubble right now is fueled from circular financing of Anthropic and OpenAI
Post reply on HN