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

Claude Sonnet 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 822 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#591

Post by siva7 »

brokencode wrote: post #316
827a wrote: post #295

Tbh we'll see what using it looks like, but the reasoning/cost charts do not look promising. It seems like the only useful reasoning level for Sonnet 5 is Low; medium might trade blows at price/performance with Opus, but anything beyond that Opus is Just Better. I struggle to understand where this model fits in. If I need a cheap model for simple stuff (like, summarizing an email); I'd go Haiku (actually, I'd go Deep…

Kind of crazy how bad this release actually is. I even dug around in the full system card, and every graph showed the same thing. Low and maybe medium will save money on simpler tasks, but after that it just isn’t worth it compared to Opus. I wish they would have explained in the blog post why they think anybody would ever want to use this above medium. Maybe it works well on things that aren’t clear in the benchmark…

Why would a company explain how limited their own major release is?

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#592

Post by sparkling »

nozzlegear wrote: post #186
microtonal wrote: post #31

Claude Sonnet 5 is built to be the most agentic Sonnet model yet. It can make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models. I have been using Sonnet 4.6 more than Opus, because I'm mostly doing agent-assisted development and not fully agent-driven development. This announcement does not make me positive, I have fou…

> I have been moving more and more to K2.7 Code and GLM-5.2 the last few weeks. They are often good enough for assistance, very fast, and cheap. I've moved completely to local models that I run with my M1 Mac Studio (64gb ram) some time ago. But for the rare times when I feel the local, quantized Qwen3.6 isn't enough, I just connect to Openrouter and use something like Kimi, GLM or Deepseek for a fraction of the pric…

What is your motivation? Privacy and/or data protection?

I currently don't see a world where it makes sense to run a local model that will eats up 60% of my RAM, 20-30% of my disk space while providing worse quality output than a $20/month subscription.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#593

Post by strangegecko »

topato wrote: post #562
anonzzzies wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, that is why you need to be early. I fully believe my company won't make it another 30 years (or 10), so we prepare for that. Also, I will be dead by then, but that is unrelated. For now everyone is still sufficiently crap at using AI to need help. We had enough clients trying to build something themselves and then come crying to us.

Having a health problem that puts an end date on your effort must tint your business choices in a unique and interesting way. I find your ideas intriguing, and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

We all have a health problem that puts an end date on our efforts.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#594

Post by brookst »

casey2 wrote: post #572
kelnos wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why even bother posting, especially as a reply to a completely unrelated comment? This is just not substantive or useful to the conversation. (And I say this as someone who agrees with you that it's garbage that these companies are trying to legislate their way into an oligopoly.)

If you give Anthropic money they will make your life worse in another aspect, it's relevant to all their models. The best principle is to not give money to people who want to harm you. Anthropic has gone past fearmongering and well into terrorism. I think people on Hacker News should not recommend working with terrorist orgs.

“Terrorism” is so ludicrous a hyperbole that it completely discredits your position.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#595

Post by yieldcrv »

pbgcp2026 wrote: post #543
yieldcrv wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s everyone favorite GLM provider? z.ai doesnt always have the most reliable AI but I don’t mind the party seeing my trade secrets and thoughts compared to an American corporation + the party seeing my trade secrets and thoughts. So thats not a functional difference to me, and the Chinese one won’t reply to subpoenas so thats a value add tbh So I’ll consider all, fastest tokens/sec wins

Run it on Amazon Bedrock or GCP vertex. No problems at all .

how much does that cost

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#596

Post by solenoid0937 »

081c28a92 wrote: post #230
baq wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is gpt 5.6?

Victim of the same hype generated by Dario. Now everyone has to walk on eggshells, do limited releases to trusted partners, and nerf their cybersecurity capabilities lest they get deemed “too powerful to release”.

Yeah Anthropic should have just lied about the capabilities of the model and/or hid them until launch. That is surely more ethical behavior.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#597

Post by solenoid0937 »

ls612 wrote: post #411
bjelkeman-again wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any good reference for how?

https://github.com/p-e-w/heretic

Anyone recommending alliteration ironically proves the argument against open weights from an AI safety perspective.

After a certain level of capability you're proposing handing loaded nukes to everyone. There is an end of the road to the "open models are good" argument and that end is when they start turning into cyber super weapons.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#598

Post by dimgl »

mwigdahl wrote: post #189
tripleee wrote: post #78

interesting how much worse the sentiment around Anthropic is getting

Seems like a combination of multiple factors: "They took my shit away!" -- 3-day Fable 5 addicts (me) "How dare they tell Trump no?" -- US nationalist / "my country right or wrong" types "Great to see a closed source company fail!" -- open source boosters "Great to see an American company fail!" -- anti-US, and/or pro-China folks "Great to see a successful company fail!" -- anti-capitalists and/or sour-grapes crab bu…

Yeah you're overthinking it. Their product releases and their general approach to business is harming their business.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#599

Post by hhh »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #579
pmarreck wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think they're a net gain if you're a skilled senior I'm a skilled senior (I'm 54 and been coding since I was about 8; I've been 100% AI-generated code for at least 6 months now and have produced a combination of speed and quality that has astonished me; my velocity is apparent at https://github.com/pmarreck/ ) and this has been a massive net gain, so your claim is now officially in sheer defiance of reality…

Have you really found claude to much more more capable than eg deepseek? Anthropic has little to no chance of producing a competitive business model in the long term.

Yeah, using deepseek feels like shit and I spend hours steering deepseek in a direction versus opus-4.7 or 4.8 where I can just kinda let it ball out on some reverse engineering problems.
Post reply on HN