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

Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 322 posts

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#211

Post by iLoveOncall »

hbosch wrote: post #42
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon also uses Claude under the hood for their "Rufus" shopping search assistant which is all over amazon.com. It's kind of funny, you can ask Rufus for stuff like "write a hello world in python for me" and then it will do it and also recommend some python books.

Are you sure? While Amazon doesn't own a "true" frontier model they have their own foundation model called Nova. I assume if Amazon was using Claude's latest models to power it's AI tools, such as Alexa+ or Rufus, they would be much better than they currently are. I assume if their consumer facing AI is using Claude at all it would be a Sonnet or Haiku model from 1+ versions back simply due to cost.

> Are you sure? While Amazon doesn't own a "true" frontier model they have their own foundation model called Nova.

I work for Amazon, everyone is using Claude. Nova is a piece of crap, nobody is using it. It's literally useless.

I haven't tried the new versions that just came out though.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#212

Post by SeanAnderson »

hyperbovine wrote: post #19
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #16

It's interesting that Amazon don't appear interested in acquiring Anthropic, which would have seemed like somewhat of a natural fit given that they are already partnered, Anthropic have apparently optimized (or at least adapted) for Trainium, and Amazon don't have their own frontier model. It seems that Amazon are playing this much like Microsoft - seeing themselves are more of a cloud provider, happy to serve anyone…

LOL of course they don't want to own Anthropic, else they themselves would be responsible for coming up with the $10s of billions in Monopoly money that Anthropic has committed to pay AMZN for compute in the next few years. Better to take an impressive looking stake and leave some other idiot holding the buck.

Isn't taking an impressive looking stake, in effect, leaving them holding the buck?

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#213

Post by JimDabell »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #111
Lionga wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dario Amodei gives of strong Adam Neumann vibes. He claimed "AI will replace 90% of developers within 6 months" about a year ago...

And 12 months later Anthropic is listing 200 open positions for humans: https://www.anthropic.com/jobs

Of course they are. The two things aren’t contradictory at all, in fact one strongly implies the other. If AI is writing 90% of your code, that means the total contribution of a developer is 10× the code they would write without AI. This means you get way more value per developer, so why wouldn’t you keep hiring developers?

This idea that “AI writes 90% of our code” means you don’t need developers seems to spring from a belief that there is a fixed amount of software to produce, so if AI is doing 90% of it then you only need 10% of the developers. So far, the world’s appetite for software is insatiable and every time we get more productive, we use the same amount of effort to build more software than before.

The point at which Anthropic will stop hiring developers is when AI meets or exceeds the capabilities of the best human developers. Then they can just buy more servers instead of hiring developers. But nobody is claiming AI is capable of that so far, so of course they are going to capitalise on their productivity gains by hiring more developers.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#215

Post by tomjakubowski »

dkdcio wrote: post #147
efsavage wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're definitely right, for the moment. I've been forcing myself to use/learn the tools almost exclusively for the past 3-4 months and I was definitely not seeing any big wins early on, but improvement (of my skills and the tools) has been steady and positive, and right now I'd say I'm ahead of where I was the old-fashioned way, but on an uneven basis. Some things I'm probably still behind on, others I'm way…

it’s wild that engineers need months or years to properly learn programming languages but dismiss AI tooling after one bad interaction

I think inertia and determinism play roles here. If you invest months in learning an established programming language, it's not likely to change much during that time, nor in the months (and years) that follow. Your hard-earned knowledge is durable and easy to keep up to date.

In the AI coding and tooling space everything seems to be constantly changing: which models, what workflows, what tools are in favor are all in flux. My hesitancy to dive in and regularly include AI tooling in my own programming workflow is largely about that. I'd rather wait until the dust has settled some.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#216

Post by cebert »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #170
nikcub wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been multiple model generations now where Anthropic have proven that they're ahead of everyone with developing LLMs for coding - if anything the gap has broadened with Opus 4.5.

Codex is and has been superior for some time (though it is slower)

What types of tasks do you find Codex superior?

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#217

Post by mbesto »

efsavage wrote: post #118
Lionga wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dario Amodei gives of strong Adam Neumann vibes. He claimed "AI will replace 90% of developers within 6 months" about a year ago...

It was "writing 90% of the code", which seems to be pretty accurate, if not conservative, for those keeping up with the latest tools.

> which seems to be pretty accurate

It's not, even by his own citing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWs71LtxpTE

He said that this applies to "many teams" rather than "uniformly across the whole company".

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#218

Post by bobbiechen »

antiloper wrote: post #54
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon also uses Claude under the hood for their "Rufus" shopping search assistant which is all over amazon.com. It's kind of funny, you can ask Rufus for stuff like "write a hello world in python for me" and then it will do it and also recommend some python books.

> It's kind of funny, you can ask Rufus for stuff like "write a hello world in python for me" and then it will do it and also recommend some python books. Interesting, I tried it with the chatbot widget on my city government's page, and it worked as well. I wonder if someone has already made an openrouter-esque service that can connect claude code to this network of chat widgets. There are enough of them to spread yo…

Not sure for Claude Code specifically, but in the general case, yes - GPT4Free and friends.

I think if you run any kind of freely-accessible LLM, it is inevitable that someone is going to try to exploit it for their own profit. It's usually pretty obvious when they find it because your bill explodes.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#219

Post by cmiles8 »

conroydave wrote: post #33
baggachipz wrote: post #25

That S1 is gonna make for a fun read. It'll make Adam Neumann blush.

that wework s1 was gold

It was so bad a lot of folks thought it was fake when first released! People couldn’t believe WeWork was actually that clueless about how six a thing would land.

Re: Anthropic taps IPO lawyers as it races OpenAI to go public

#220

Post by dkdcio »

tomjakubowski wrote: post #215
dkdcio wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it’s wild that engineers need months or years to properly learn programming languages but dismiss AI tooling after one bad interaction

I think inertia and determinism play roles here. If you invest months in learning an established programming language, it's not likely to change much during that time, nor in the months (and years) that follow. Your hard-earned knowledge is durable and easy to keep up to date. In the AI coding and tooling space everything seems to be constantly changing: which models, what workflows, what tools are in favor are all i…

totally fair. I do think a lot of the learnings remain relevant (stuff I learned back in April is still roughly what I do now), and I am increasingly seeing people share the same learnings; tips & tricks that work and whatnot (i.e. I think we’re getting to the dust settling about now? maybe a few more months? definitely uneven distribution)

also FWIW I think healthy skepticism is great; but developers outright denying this technology will be useful going forward are in for a rude awakening IMO

Post reply on HN