Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic.com

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#311
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds wayyyy over the top for a mode that released 10 mins ago. At least wait an hour or so before spewing breathless hype.

He just explained a specific personal example why he is hyped up, did you read a word of it?

Yeah, I read it.

“Speechless, shocked, unbelievable, insane, speechless”, etc.

Not a lot of real substance there.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Claude now automatically records and recalls memories as it works Neat: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/memory I guess it's kind of like Google Antigravity's "Knowledge" artifacts?

Are we sure the docs page has been updated yet? Because that page doesn't say anything about automatic recording of memories.

Oh, quite right. I saw people mention MEMORY.md online and I assumed that was the doc for it, but it looks like it isn't.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One aspect of this is that apparently most people can't draw a bicycle much better than this: they get the elements of the frame wrong, mess up the geometry, etc.

Yes, but obviously AGI will solve this by, _checks notes_ more TerraWatts!

…in space!

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#315
post #80

I'm disappointed that they're removing the prefill option: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/about-claude/models/what... > Prefilling assistant messages (last-assistant-turn prefills) is not supported on Opus 4.6. Requests with prefilled assistant messages return a 400 error. That was a really cool feature of the Claude API where you could force it to begin its response with e.g. ` They suggest structured outputs o…

So what exactly is the input to Claude for a multi-turn conversation? I assume delimiters are being added to distinguish the user vs Claude turns (else a prefill would be the same as just ending your input with the prefill text)?

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#316
post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not see any reporting or evidence at all that Anthropic or OpenAI is able to make money on inference yet. > Turns out there was a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of inference optimization that hadn't been plucked yet. That does not mean the frontier labs are pricing their APIs to cover their costs yet. It can both be true that it has gotten cheaper for them to provide inference and that they still are subsid…

It's quite clear that these companies do make money on each marginal token. They've said this directly and analysts agree [1]. It's less clear that the margins are high enough to pay off the up-front cost of training each model. [1] https://epochai.substack.com/p/can-ai-companies-become-profi...

> They've said this directly and analysts agree [1]

chasing down a few sources in that article leads to articles like this at the root of claims[1], which is entirely based on information "according to a person with knowledge of the company’s financials", which doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

[1] https://www.theinformation.com/articles/openai-getting-effic...

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#317
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says "subscription users do not have access to Opus 4.6 1M context at launch" so they are probably planning to roll it out to subscription users too.

Man I hope so - the context limit is hit really quickly in many of my use cases - and a compaction event inevitably means another round of corrections and fixes to the current task. Though I'm wary about that being a magic bullet fix - already it can be pretty "selective" in what it actually seems to take into account documentation wise as the existing 200k context fills.

Is this a case of doing it wrong, or you think accuracy is good enough with the amount of context you need to stuff it with often?

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect they're training on this. I asked Opus 4.6 for a pelican riding a recumbent bicycle and got this. https://i.imgur.com/UvlEBs8.png

It would be way way better if they were benchmaxxing this. The pelican in the image (both images) has arms. Pelicans don't have arms, and a pelican riding a bike would use it's wings.

Pelicans don’t ride bikes. You can’t have scruples about whether or not the image of a pelican riding a bike has arms.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#319
Can we talk about how the performance of Opus 4.5 nosedived this morning during the rollout? It was shocking how bad it was, and after the rollout was done it immediately reverted to it's previous behavior.

I get that Anthropic probably has to do hot rollouts, but IMO it would be way better for mission critical workflows to just be locked out of the system instead of get a vastly subpar response back.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect they're training on this. I asked Opus 4.6 for a pelican riding a recumbent bicycle and got this. https://i.imgur.com/UvlEBs8.png

It would be way way better if they were benchmaxxing this. The pelican in the image (both images) has arms. Pelicans don't have arms, and a pelican riding a bike would use it's wings.

Having briefly worked in the 3D Graphics industry, I don't even remotely trust benchmarks anymore. The minute someone's benchmark performance becomes a part of the public's purchasing decision, companies will pull out every trick in the book--clean or dirty--to benchmaxx their product. Sometimes at the expense of actual real-world performance.
Post reply on HN