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

Claude Sonnet 4.5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#441

Post by FridgeSeal »

elAhmo wrote: post #390
Aflynn50 wrote: post #374

When I see how much the latest models are capable of it makes me feel depressed. As well as potentially ruining my career in the next few years, its turning all the minutiae and specifics of writing clean code, that I've worked hard to learn over the past years, into irrelivent details. All the specifics I thought were so important are just implementation details of the prompt. Maybe I've got a fairly backwards view…

Don't be so grim! This will just give you access to not worry about writing clean code as much as you did in the past - you can focus on other parts of the development lifecycle. The skill of writing good quality code is still going to be beneficial, maybe less emphasized on writing side, but critical of shipping good code, even when someone (something) else wrote it.

“Do t worry about the fit and finish in your craftsmanship anymore, just bolt everything together and move on to other woodworking”

Is how that argument comes across.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#442

Post by epolanski »

rishabhaiover wrote: post #264

hn displays a religious hatred towards ai progress

Most people here use these models as you can see from the comments.

But we can also see that we're one of the few sane skeptical places in a world that is making the most diverse claims about AI.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#443

Post by fnordsensei »

GoatInGrey wrote: post #367
fnordsensei wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the purpose of it, as I understand it; it’s a token phrase generated to cajole it down a particular path.[1] An alignment mechanism. The complement appears to be, “actually, that’s not right.”, a correction mechanism. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45137802

It gets annoying because A) it so quickly dismisses its own logic and conclusion from less than two minutes ago (extreme confidence with minimal conviction), and B) it fucks up the second time too (sometimes in the same way!) about 33% of the time.

I’ve had the opposite experience with GPT-5, where it’s utterly convinced that its own (incorrect) solution is the way to go that it turns me down and preemptively launches tools to implement what it has in mind.

I get that it’s tradeoffs, but erring on the side of the human being correct is probably going to be a safer bet for another generation or two.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#444

Post by epolanski »

poisonborz wrote: post #182
catigula wrote: post #49

I happened to be in the middle of a task in a production codebase that the various models struggled on so I can give a quick vibe benchmark: opus 4.1: made weird choices, eventually got to a meh solution i just rolled back. codex: took a disgusting amount of time but the result was vastly superior to opus. night and day superiority. output was still not what i wanted. sonnet 4.5: not clearly better than opus. categor…

These reviews are pretty useless to other developers. Models perform vastly differently with each language, task type, framework.

And prompt and usage.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#445

Post by fabmilo »

ojosilva wrote: post #426

To @simonw and all the coding agent and LLM benchmarkers out there: please, always publish the elapsed time for the task to complete successfully! I know this was just a "it works straight in claude.ai" post, but still, nowhere in the transcript there's a timestamp of any kind. Durations seem to be COMPLETELY missing from the LLM coding leaderboards everywhere [1] [2] [3] There's a huge difference in time-to-completi…

Yeah I totally agree, we need time to completion of each step and the number of steps, sizes of prompts, number of tools, ... and better visualization of each run and break down based on the difficulty of the task

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#446

Post by epolanski »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #430
epolanski wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That minutiae was always borderline irrelevant, the skill was always making somebody money, possibly with software. The reality is that more software will be pushed than before, and more of it will need to be overseen by a professional.

The real question is what kind of pay that work will demand. It's will be great to still be employed as a senior dev. It will be a little less great with a $110k salary, 5 day commute, and mediocre benefits being the norm.

The market was heading for saturation anyway with more and more people getting into it not for interest but job prospects.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#447

Post by devinprater »

I hope that one day Anthropic work on making Claude more accessible to screen reader users. ChatGPT is currently the only AI that I know of that, when it's thinking, sends that status to the screen reader, and then sends the response to the screen reader to be spoken as well, like any other good chat app does.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#448

Post by Darkskiez »

inopinatus wrote: post #391
siva7 wrote: post #380

Does 4.5 still answer everything with "You're absolutely right!" or is it now able to communicate like a real programmer?

I won’t be satisfied until I get a Linus Torvalds mode. “Your idea is shit because you are so fucking stupid” “Please stop talking, it hurts my GPUs thinking down to your level” “I may seem evil but at least I’m not incompetent”

Stop disagreeing with me, I don't want any more prompts from you, your code is now externally maintained.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#450

Post by nvarsj »

AbuAssar wrote: post #432

I used to treat writing code as a form of art, with attention to details and best practices, and using design patterns whenever possible. but it seems this will come to an end eventually as these agents become more stronger and capable each day, and will be better and faster than human coders.

Yup, we're headed to the robot assembly line, with a few experts making sure it all works correctly.

Craftsmen will remain, but it will be niche (and probably not pay anything unless you are a true master).

Post reply on HN