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

Claude Sonnet 4.6

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#371

Post by tokioyoyo »

spyckie2 wrote: post #355
andsoitis wrote: post #77

I’m voting with my dollars by having cancelled my ChatGPT subscription and instead subscribing to Claude. Google needs stiff competition and OpenAI isn’t the camp I’m willing to trust. Neither is Grok. I’m glad Anthropic’s work is at the forefront and they appear, at least in my estimation, to have the strongest ethics.

Anthropic was the first to spam reddit with fake users and posts, flooding and controlling their subreddit to be a giant sycophant. They nuked the internet by themselves. Basically they are the willing and happy instigators of the dead internet as long as they profit from it. They are by no means ethical, they are a for-profit company.

I actually agree with you, but I have no idea how one can compete in this playing field. The second there are a couple of bad actors in spammarketing, your hands are tied. You really can’t win without playing dirty.

I really hate this, not justifying their behaviour, but have no clue how one can do without the other.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#372

Post by yakbarber »

andrewchilds wrote: post #244

Many people have reported Opus 4.6 is a step back from Opus 4.5 - that 4.6 is consuming 5-10x as many tokens as 4.5 to accomplish the same task: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/23706 I haven't seen a response from the Anthropic team about it. I can't help but look at Sonnet 4.6 in the same light, and want to stick with 4.5 across the board until this issue is acknowledged and resolved.

Opus 4.6 is so much better at building complex systems than 4.5 it's ridiculous.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#373

Post by dakolli »

andsoitis wrote: post #77

I’m voting with my dollars by having cancelled my ChatGPT subscription and instead subscribing to Claude. Google needs stiff competition and OpenAI isn’t the camp I’m willing to trust. Neither is Grok. I’m glad Anthropic’s work is at the forefront and they appear, at least in my estimation, to have the strongest ethics.

You "agentic coders" say you're switching back and forth every other week. Like everything else in this trend, its very giving of 2021 crypto shill dynamics. Ya'll sound like the NFT people that said they were transforming art back then, and also like how they'd switch between their favorite "chain" every other month. Can't wait for this to blow up just like all that did.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#374

Post by acuozzo »

KGC3D wrote: post #360

I don't really understand why they would release something "worse" than Opus 4.6. If it's comparable, then what is the reason to even use Opus 4.6? Sure, it's cheaper, but if so, then just make Opus 4.6 cheaper?

It's different. Download an English book from Project Gutenberg and have Claude-code change its style. Try both models and you'll see how significant the differences are.

(Sonnet is far, far better at this kind of task than Opus is, in my experience.)

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#375

Post by AustinDev »

drcongo wrote: post #361
SatvikBeri wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also seen Opus 4.6 as a pure upgrade. In particular, it's noticeably better at debugging complex issues and navigating our internal/custom framework.

Same here. 4.6 has been considerably more dilligent for me.

Likewise, I feel like it's degraded in performance a bit over the last couple weeks but that's just vibes. They surely vary thinking tokens based on load on the backend, especially for subscription users.

When my subscription 4.6 is flagging I'll switch over to Corporate API version and run the same prompts and get a noticeably better solution. In the end it's hard to compare nondeterministic systems.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#376

Post by user2722 »

skybrian wrote: post #252
the_duke wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An Anthropic safety researcher just recently quit with very cryptic messages , saying "the world is in peril"... [1] (which may mean something, or nothing at all) Codex quite often refuses to do "unsafe/unethical" things that Anthropic models will happily do without question. Anthropic just raised 30 bn... OpenAI wants to raise 100bn+. Thinking any of them will actually be restrained by ethics is foolish. [1] https:/…

The letter is here: https://x.com/MrinankSharma/status/2020881722003583421 A slightly longer quote: > The world is in peril. And not just from AI, or from bioweapons, gut from a whole series of interconnected crises unfolding at this very moment. In a footnote he refers to the "poly-crisis." There are all sorts of things one might decide to do in response, including getting more involved in US politics, working more…

Similar to Peripheral TV series' Jackpot?

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#377

Post by evilhackerdude »

wongarsu wrote: post #341
andrewchilds wrote: post #244

Many people have reported Opus 4.6 is a step back from Opus 4.5 - that 4.6 is consuming 5-10x as many tokens as 4.5 to accomplish the same task: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/23706 I haven't seen a response from the Anthropic team about it. I can't help but look at Sonnet 4.6 in the same light, and want to stick with 4.5 across the board until this issue is acknowledged and resolved.

Keep in mind that the people who experience issues will always be the loudest. I've overall enjoyed 4.6. On many easy things it thinks less than 4.5, leading to snappier feedback. And 4.6 seems much more comfortable calling tools: it's much more proactive about looking at the git history to understand the history of a bug or feature, or about looking at online documentation for APIs and packages. A recent claude code…

keep in mind that people who point out a regression and measure the actual #tok, which costs $money, aren't just "being loud" — someone diffed session context usaage and found 4.6 burning >7x the amount of context on a task that 4.5 did in under 2 MB⁣.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#378

Post by idiotsecant »

the_duke wrote: post #157
andsoitis wrote: post #77

I’m voting with my dollars by having cancelled my ChatGPT subscription and instead subscribing to Claude. Google needs stiff competition and OpenAI isn’t the camp I’m willing to trust. Neither is Grok. I’m glad Anthropic’s work is at the forefront and they appear, at least in my estimation, to have the strongest ethics.

An Anthropic safety researcher just recently quit with very cryptic messages , saying "the world is in peril"... [1] (which may mean something, or nothing at all) Codex quite often refuses to do "unsafe/unethical" things that Anthropic models will happily do without question. Anthropic just raised 30 bn... OpenAI wants to raise 100bn+. Thinking any of them will actually be restrained by ethics is foolish. [1] https:/…

That guys blog makes him seem insufferable. All signs point to drama and nothing of particular significance.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#379

Post by ptrwis »

retinaros wrote: post #134
simlevesque wrote: post #62

I can't wait for Haiku 4.6 ! the 4.5 is a beast for the right projects.

Which type of projects?

I also use Haiku daily and it's OK. One app is trading simulation algorithm in TypeScript (it implemented bayesian optimisation for me, optimised algorithm to use worker threads). Another one is CRUD app (NextJS, now switched to Vue).

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#380

Post by tartoran »

poszlem wrote: post #319
gallerdude wrote: post #55

I always grew up hearing “competition is good for the consumer.” But I never really internalized how good fierce battles for market share are. The amount of competition in a space is directly proportional to how good the results are for consumers.

This is a bit of a tangent, but it highlights exactly what people miss when talking about China taking over our industries. Right now, China has about 140 different car brands, roughly 100 of which are domestic. Compare that to Europe, where we have about 50 brands competing, or the US, which is essentially a walled garden with fewer than 40. That level of internal fierce competition is a massive reason why they are…

It's the low cost of labor in addition to lack of environmental regulation that made China a success story. I'm sure the competition helps too but it's not main driver
Post reply on HN