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

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#431

Post by Squarex »

legitster wrote: post #72

I'm still not sure I understand Anthropic's general strategy right now. They are doing these broad marketing programs trying to take on ChatGPT for "normies". And yet their bread and butter is still clearly coding. Meanwhile, Claude's general use cases are... fine. For generic research topics, I find that ChatGPT and Gemini run circles around it: in the depth of research, the type of tasks it can handle, and the qual…

Claude sucks at non English languages. Gemini and ChatGPT are much better. Grok is the worst. I am a native Czech speaker and Claude makes up words and Grok sometimes respond in Russian. So while I love it for coding, it’s unusable for general purpose for me.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#432

Post by schnable »

3836293648 wrote: post #237
Aurornis wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A year or more ago, I read that both Anthropic and OpenAI were losing money on every single request even for their paid subscribers This gets repeated everywhere but I don't think it's true. The company is unprofitable overall, but I don't see any reason to believe that their per-token inference costs are below the marginal cost of computing those tokens. It is true that the company is unprofitable overall when you…

The reports I remember show that they're profitable per-model, but overlap R&D so that the company is negative overall. And therefore will turn a massive profit if they stop making new models.

* stop making new models and people keep using the existing models, not switch to a competitor still investing in new models.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#433

Post by insane_dreamer »

itay-maman wrote: post #407

Important: I didn't see opus 4.6 in claude code. I have native install (which is the recommended instllation). So, I re-run the installation command and, voila, I have it now (v 2.1.32) Installation instructions: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/overview#get-started-in-30-s...

It’s there. I’m already using it

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#434

Post by dwaltrip »

elAhmo wrote: post #349
jsheard wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CC has >6000 open issues, despite their bot auto-culling them after 60 days of inactivity. It was ~5800 when I looked just a few days ago so they seem to be accelerating towards some kind of bug singularity.

Insane to think that a relatively simple CLI tool has so many open issues...

sips coffee… ahh yes, let me find that classic Dropbox rsync comment

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#436

Post by raincole »

surajkumar5050 wrote: post #396

I think two things are getting conflated in this discussion. First: marginal inference cost vs total business profitability. It’s very plausible (and increasingly likely) that OpenAI/Anthropic are profitable on a per-token marginal basis, especially given how cheap equivalent open-weight inference has become. Third-party providers are effectively price-discovering the floor for inference. Second: model lifecycle econ…

> the interesting question isn’t “are they subsidizing inference?”

The interesting question is if they are subsidizing the $200/mo plan. That's what is supporting the whole vibecoding/agentic coding thing atm. I don't believe Claude Code would have taken off if it were token-by-token from day 1.

(My baseless bet is that they're, but not by much and the price will eventually rise by perhaps 2x but not 10x.)

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#437

Post by breuleux »

bopbopbop7 wrote: post #389
breuleux wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These feel like they involve something beyond "predict the next token really well, with a reasoning trace." I don't think there's anything you can't do by "predicting the next token really well". It's an extremely powerful and extremely general mechanism. Saying there must be "something beyond that" is a bit like saying physical atoms can't be enough to implement thought and there must be something beyond the physi…

> Besides, what is the human brain if not a machine that generates "tokens" that the body propagates through nerves to produce physical actions? Ah yes, the brain is as simple as predicting the next token, you just cracked what neuroscientists couldn't for years.

The point is that "predicting the next token" is such a general mechanism as to be meaningless. We say that LLMs are "just" predicting the next token, as if this somehow explained all there was to them. It doesn't, not any more than "the brain is made out of atoms" explains the brain, or "it's a list of lists" explains a Lisp program. It's a platitude.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#438

Post by 9dev »

skydhash wrote: post #357
sbarre wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React, the framework, is separate from react-dom, the browser rendering library. Most people think of those two as one thing because they're the most popular combo. But there are many different rendering libraries you can use with React, including Ink, which is designed for building CLI TUIs..

Anyone that knows a bit about terminals would already know that using React is not a good solution for TUI. Terminal rendering is done as a stream of characters which includes both the text and how it displays, which can also alter previously rendered texts. Diffing that is nonsense.

You’re not diffing that, though. The app keeps a virtual representation of the UI state in a tree structure that it diffs on, then serializes that into a formatted string to draw to the out put stream. It’s not about limiting the amount of characters redrawn (that would indeed be nonsense), but handling separate output regions effectively.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#439

Post by djeastm »

mvdtnz wrote: post #194
jama211 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s extremely successful, not sure what it explains other than your biases

Anthropic has perhaps the most embarrassing status page history I have ever seen. They are famous for downtime. https://status.claude.com/

The best way to use Claude's models seems to be some other inference provider (either OpenRouter or directly)

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#440

Post by 9dev »

Squarex wrote: post #431
legitster wrote: post #72

I'm still not sure I understand Anthropic's general strategy right now. They are doing these broad marketing programs trying to take on ChatGPT for "normies". And yet their bread and butter is still clearly coding. Meanwhile, Claude's general use cases are... fine. For generic research topics, I find that ChatGPT and Gemini run circles around it: in the depth of research, the type of tasks it can handle, and the qual…

Claude sucks at non English languages. Gemini and ChatGPT are much better. Grok is the worst. I am a native Czech speaker and Claude makes up words and Grok sometimes respond in Russian. So while I love it for coding, it’s unusable for general purpose for me.

> Grok sometimes respond in Russian

Geopolitically speaking this is hilarious.

Post reply on HN