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

Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

tokens.billchambers.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 620 posts

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#301

Post by bigyabai »

ACCount37 wrote: post #269
gsleblanc wrote: post #142

It's increasingly looking naive to assume scaling LLMs is all you need to get to full white-collar worker replacement. The attention mechanism / hopfield network is fundamentally modeling only a small subset of the full human brain, and all the increasing sustained hype around bolted-on solutions for "agentic memory" is, in my opinion, glaring evidence that these SOTA transformers alone aren't sufficient even when yo…

You probably are. The "small subset" argument is profoundly unconvincing, and inconsistent with both neurobiology of the human brain and the actual performance of LLMs. The transformer architecture is incredibly universal and highly expressive. Transformers power LLMs, video generator models, audio generator models, SLAM models, entire VLAs and more. It not a 1:1 copy of human brain, but that doesn't mean that it's i…

> Human brain isn't the only way to implement general intelligence - just the one that was the easiest for evolution to put together out of what it had.

The human brain is not a pretrained system. It's objectively more flexible than than transformers and capable of self-modulation in ways that no ML architecture can replicate (that I'm aware of).

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#302

Post by tossandthrow »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #223
tossandthrow wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could definitely maintain the infrastructure without an llm. Albeit much slower. And yes. If LLMs disappear, then we need to hire a lot of people to maintain the infrastructure. Which naturally is a part of the risk modeling.

> I could definitely maintain the infrastructure without an llm Not what I asked, but thanks for playing.

You literally asked that question

> Could you do it again without the help of an LLM?

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#303

Post by dakiol »

dirasieb wrote: post #262
sergiotapia wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can recommend this stack. It works well with the existing Claude skills I had in my code repos: 1. Opencode 2. Fireworks AI: GLM 5.1 And it is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper than Claude. I'm waiting eagerly for something new from Deepseek. They are going to really show us magic.

it is also significantly less capable than claude

That's fine. When the "best of the best" is offered only by a couple of companies that are not looking into our best interests, then we can discard them

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#304

Post by ACCount37 »

bigyabai wrote: post #301
ACCount37 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably are. The "small subset" argument is profoundly unconvincing, and inconsistent with both neurobiology of the human brain and the actual performance of LLMs. The transformer architecture is incredibly universal and highly expressive. Transformers power LLMs, video generator models, audio generator models, SLAM models, entire VLAs and more. It not a 1:1 copy of human brain, but that doesn't mean that it's i…

> Human brain isn't the only way to implement general intelligence - just the one that was the easiest for evolution to put together out of what it had. The human brain is not a pretrained system. It's objectively more flexible than than transformers and capable of self-modulation in ways that no ML architecture can replicate (that I'm aware of).

Human brain's "pre-training" is evolution cramming way too much structure into it. It "learns from scratch" the way it does because it doesn't actually learn from scratch.

I've seen plenty of wacky test-time training things used in ML nowadays, which is probably the closest to how the human brain learns. None are stable enough to go into the frontier LLMs, where in-context learning still reigns supreme. In-context learning is a "good enough" continuous learning approximatation, it seems.

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#305

Post by thih9 »

bdangubic wrote: post #279
estetlinus wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, +1. I will never be working on unsolved problems anyhow. Skill atrophy is not happening if you stay curious and responsible.

I used to speak Russian like I was born in Russia. I stopped talking Russian … every day I am curious ans responsible but I can hardly say 10 words in Russian today. if you don’t use it (not just be curious and responsible) you will lose it - period.

Programming language is not just syntax, keywords and standard libraries, but also: processes, best practices and design principles. The latter group I guess is more difficult to learn and harder to forget.

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#306

Post by sroussey »

subscribed wrote: post #260
bluefirebrand wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am learning at an incredible rate with LLMs Could you do it again without the help of an LLM? If no, then can you really claim to have learned anything?

>> I am learning a new skill with instructor at an incredible rate > Could you do it again on your own? Can you you see how nonsensical your stance is? You're straight up accusing GP of lying they are learning something at the increased rate OR suggesting if they couldn't learn that, presumably at the same rate, on they own, they're not learning anything. That's not very wise to project your own experiences on others…

Actually, it’s much like taking a physics or engineering course, and after the class being fully able to explain the class that day, and yet realize later when you are doing the homework that you did not actually fully understand like you thought you did.

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#307

Post by HWR_14 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #155
aliljet wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What open models are truly competing with both Claude Code and Opus 4.7 (xhigh) at this stage?

That's a lame attitude. There are local models that are last year's SOTA, but that's not good enough because this year's SOTA is even better yet still... I've said it before and I'll say it again, local models are "there" in terms of true productive usage for complex coding tasks. Like, for real, there. The issue right now is that buying the compute to run the top end local models is absurdly unaffordable. Both in ge…

$10k is a lot of tokens.

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#308

Post by somewhereoutth »

dakiol wrote: post #46

We dropped Claude. It's pretty clear this is a race to the bottom, and we don't want a hard dependency on another multi-billion dollar company just to write software We'll be keeping an eye on open models (of which we already make good use of). I think that's the way forward. Actually it would be great if everybody would put more focus on open models, perhaps we can come up with something like the "linux/postgres/git…

My understanding is that the major part of the cost of a given model is the training - so open models depend on the training that was done for frontier models? I'm finding hard to imagine (e.g.) RLHF being fundable through a free software type arrangement.

Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7

#309

Post by zozbot234 »

aerhardt wrote: post #200
gsleblanc wrote: post #142

It's increasingly looking naive to assume scaling LLMs is all you need to get to full white-collar worker replacement. The attention mechanism / hopfield network is fundamentally modeling only a small subset of the full human brain, and all the increasing sustained hype around bolted-on solutions for "agentic memory" is, in my opinion, glaring evidence that these SOTA transformers alone aren't sufficient even when yo…

> you just limit the space to text And even then... why can't they write a novel? Or lowering the bar, let's say a novella like Death in Venice , Candide , The Metamorphosis , Breakfast at Tiffany's ...? Every book's in the training corpus... Is it just a matter of someone not having spent a hundred grand in tokens to do it?

Never mind novels, it can't even write a good Reddit-style or HN-style comment. agentalcove.ai has an archive of AI models chatting to one another in "forum" style and even though it's a good show of the models' overall knowledge the AIisms are quite glaring.
Post reply on HN