321–330 of 540 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, and I just made a recommendation that was essentially "never enable Opus 4.7" to my org as a direct result. We have Opus 4.6 (3x) and Opus 4.5 (3x) enabled currently. They are worth it for planning . At 7.5x for 4.7, heck no. It isn't even clear it is an upgrade over Opus 4.6.
Microsoft are going to be removing Opus 4.5 and 4.6 from Copilot soon so I'd enjoy the lower cost while it lasts.
I did some work yesterday with Opus and found it amazing. Today we are almost on non-speaking terms. I'm asking it to do some simple stuff and he's making incredible stupid mistakes: This is the third time that I have to ask you to remove the issue that was there for more than 20 hours. What is going on here? and at the same time the compacting is firing like crazy. (What adds ~4 minute delays every 1 - 15 minutes) |…
They won't. These are not "issues", it's them trying to push the models to burn less compute. It will only get worse.
The only misprediction it makes is that AI is creating the brain dead user base...
You have to hook your customers before you reel them in!
https://www.netflix.com/gb/title/70264888?s=a&trkid=13747225...
LLMs exist on a logaritmhic performance/cost frontier. It's not really clear whether Opus 4.5+ represent a level shift on this frontier or just inhabits place on that curve which delivers higher performance, but at rapidly diminishing returns to inference cost. To me, it is hard to reject this hypothesis today. The fact that Anthropic is rapidly trying to increase price may betray the fact that their recent lead is a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It wouldn't surprise me if in 2-3 years the "max" plan is $800 or $2000 even. I'd rather be surprised if they are still doing business by then.
I would not be surprised at all, a $1,000/mo tool that makes your $20,000/mo engineer a lot more productive is an easy sell. I’m guessing we’re gonna have a world like working on cars - most people won’t have expensive tools (ex a full hydraulic lift) for personal stuff, they are gonna have to make do with lesser tools.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah thats is my biggest issue - im okay with paying 20-30% more but what is the ROI? i dont see an equivalent improvement in performance. Anthropic hasnt published any data around what these improvements are - just some vague “better instruction following"
Its enshittificating real fast. They'll just keep releasing model after model, more expensive than the last, marginal gains, but touted as "the next thing". Evangelists will say that they're afraid, it's the future, in 6 months it's all over. Anthropic will keep astroturfing on Reddit. CEOs will make even more outlandish claims. You raised a good point, what's a good metric for LLM performance? There's surely all the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
productivity (tokens per second per hardware unit) increases at the cost of output quality, but the price remains the same. both Anthropic and OpenAI quantize their models a few weeks after release. they'd never admit it out loud, but it's more or less common knowledge now. no one has enough compute.
Pretty bold claim - you have a source for that?
Tons of conspiracy theories and accusations.
I've never seen any compelling studies(or raw data even) to back any of it up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
productivity (tokens per second per hardware unit) increases at the cost of output quality, but the price remains the same. both Anthropic and OpenAI quantize their models a few weeks after release. they'd never admit it out loud, but it's more or less common knowledge now. no one has enough compute.
Do you have a source for that claim?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.09009
but of course, this isn't a written statement by a corporate spokespersyn. I don't think that breweries make such statements when they water their beer either.
Good lord. Reading all these comments makes me feel so much better for dumping anthropic the first time their opus started becoming dumber (circa Month ago). It feels like most people in this thread are somehow bound to Claude, even though it is alread fully enshittfied.
Lots of questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're also getting closer to IPO and have a growing user base. They can't justify losing a very large number of billions of other people's money in their IPO prospectus. So there's a push for them to increase revenue per user, which brings us closer to the real cost of running these models.
I agree, and I'm also quite skeptical that Anthropic will be able to remain true to its initial, noble mission statement of acting for the global good once they IPO. At that point you are beholden to your shareholders and no longer can eschew profit in favor of ethics. Unfortunately, I think this is the beginning of the end of Anthropic and Modei being a company and CEO you could actually get behind and believe that…
No not really, you can issue two types of shares, the company founders can control a type of shares which has more voting power while other shareholders can get a different type of shares with less voting power.
Facebook, Google has something similar.