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

Claude Integrations

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 266 posts

Re: Claude Integrations

#31

Post by ilrwbwrkhv »

throwup238 wrote: post #16

The leap frogging at this point is getting insane (in a good way, I guess?). The amount of time each state of the art feature gets before it's supplanted is a few weeks at this point. LLMs were always a fun novelty for me until OpenAI DeepResearch which started to actually come up with useful results on more complex programming questions (where I needed to write all the code by hand but had to pull together lots of d…

None of those reports are any good though. Maybe for shallow research, but I haven't found them deep. Can you share what kind of research you have been trying there where it has done a great job of actual deep research.

Re: Claude Integrations

#32

Post by medhir »

boh wrote: post #8

I think all the retail LLM's are working to broaden the available context, but in most practical use-cases it's having the ability to minimize and filter the context that would produce the most value. Even a single PDF with too many similar datapoints leads to confusion in output. They need to switch gears from the high growth, "every thing is possible and available" narrative, to one that narrows the scope. The "hal…

you hit the nail on the head. my experience with prompting LLMs is that providing extra context that isn’t explicitly needed leads to “distracted” outputs

Re: Claude Integrations

#33

Post by xnx »

WillAdams wrote: post #17
xnx wrote: post #6

Integrations are nice, but the superpower is having an AI smart enough to operate a computer/keyboard/mouse so it can do anything without the cooperation/consent of the service being used. Lots of people are making moves in this space (including Anthropic), but nothing has broken through to the mainstream.

Or even access multiple files? Why can't one set up a prompt, test it against a file, then once it is working, apply it to each file in a folder in a batch process which then provides the output as a single collective file?

You can probably achieve what you want with https://github.com/simonw/llm and a little bit of command line.

Not sure what OS you're on, but in Windows it might look like this:

FOR %%F IN (*.txt) DO (TYPE "%%F" | llm -s "execute this prompt" >> "output.txt)

Re: Claude Integrations

#34

Post by throwaway7783 »

n_ary wrote: post #30

Is this the beginning of the apps for everything era and finally the SaaS for your LLM begins? Initially we had internet but value came when instead of installed apps, webapps arrived to become SaaS. Now if LLMs can use specific remote MCP which is another SaaS for your LLM, the remote MCP powered service can charge a subscription to do wonderful things and voila! Let the new golden age of SaaS for LLMs begin and the…

MCP is yet another interface for an existing SaaS (like UI and APIs), but now magically "agent enabled". And $$$ of course

Re: Claude Integrations

#35

Post by xnx »

arnaudsm wrote: post #25
xnx wrote: post #6

Integrations are nice, but the superpower is having an AI smart enough to operate a computer/keyboard/mouse so it can do anything without the cooperation/consent of the service being used. Lots of people are making moves in this space (including Anthropic), but nothing has broken through to the mainstream.

I get often ratelimited or blocked from websites because I browse them too fast with my keyboard and mouse. The AI would be slowed down significantly. LLM-desktop interfaces make great demos, but they are too slow to be usable in practice.

Good point. Probably makes sense to think of it as an assistant you assign a job to and get results back later.

Re: Claude Integrations

#36

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

WillAdams wrote: post #17
xnx wrote: post #6

Integrations are nice, but the superpower is having an AI smart enough to operate a computer/keyboard/mouse so it can do anything without the cooperation/consent of the service being used. Lots of people are making moves in this space (including Anthropic), but nothing has broken through to the mainstream.

Or even access multiple files? Why can't one set up a prompt, test it against a file, then once it is working, apply it to each file in a folder in a batch process which then provides the output as a single collective file?

I've just done something similar with Claude Desktop and its built-in MCP servers.

The limits are still buggy responses - Claude often gets stuck in a useless loop if you overfeed it with files - and lack of consistency. Sometimes hand-holding is needed to get the result you want. And it's slow.

But when it works it's amazing. If the issues and limitations were solved, this would be a complete game changer.

We're starting to get somewhat self-generating automation and complex agenting, with access to all of the world's public APIs and search resources, controlled by natural language.

I can't see the edges of what could be possible with this. It's limited and clunky for now, but the potential is astonishing - at least as radical an invention as the web was.

Re: Claude Integrations

#37

Post by drivingmenuts »

Is each Claude instance a separate individual or is a shared AI? Because I'm not sure I would want an AI that learned about my confidential business information sharing that with anyone else, without my express permission.

This does not sound like it would be learning general information helpful across an industry, but specific, actionable information.

If not available now, is that something that AI vendors are working toward? If so, what is to keep them from using that knowledge to benefit themselves or others of their choosing, rather than the people they are learning from?

While people understand ethics, morals and legality (and ignore them), that does not seem like something that an AI understands in a way that might give them pause before doing an action.

Re: Claude Integrations

#38

Post by pyryt »

WhitneyLand wrote: post #19

The integrations feel so rag-ish. It talks, tells you it’s going to use a tool, searches, talks about what it found… Hope one day it will be practical to do nightly finetunes of a model per company with all core corporate data stores. This could create a seamless native model experience that knows about (almost) everything you’re doing.

I would love to do this on my codebase after every commit

Re: Claude Integrations

#39

Post by notgiorgi »

WhitneyLand wrote: post #19

The integrations feel so rag-ish. It talks, tells you it’s going to use a tool, searches, talks about what it found… Hope one day it will be practical to do nightly finetunes of a model per company with all core corporate data stores. This could create a seamless native model experience that knows about (almost) everything you’re doing.

why is finetuning talked about so much less than RAG? is it not viable at all?

Re: Claude Integrations

#40

Post by zoogeny »

I'm curious what kind of research people are doing that takes 45 minutes of LLM time. Is this a poke at the McKinsey consultant domain?

Perhaps I am just frivolous with my own time, but I tend to use LLMs in a more iterative way for research. I get partial answers, probe for more information, direct the attention of the LLM away from areas I am familiar and towards areas I am less familiar. I feel if I just let it loose for 45 minutes it would spend too much time on areas I do not find valuable.

This seems more like a play for "replacement" rather than "augmentation". Although, I suppose if I had infinite wealth, I could kick of 10+ research agents each taking 45 minutes and then review their output as it became available, then kick off round 2, etc. That is, I could do my process but instead of interactively I could do it asynchronously.

Post reply on HN