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

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#601

Post by DrewADesign »

guyomes wrote: post #561
dakolli wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their goal is to monopolize labor for anything that has to do with i/o on a computer, which is way more than SWE. Its simple, this technology literally cannot create new jobs it simply can cause one engineer (or any worker whos job has to do with computer i/o) to do the work of 3, therefore allowing you to replace workers (and overwork the ones you keep). Companies don't need "more work" half the "features"/"products…

> They can get rid of 1/3-2/3s of their labor and make the same amount of money, why wouldn't they. Competition may encourage companies to keep their labor. For example, in the video game industry, if the competitors of a company start shipping their games to all consoles at once, the company might want to do the same. Or if independent studios start shipping triple A games, a big studio may want to keep their labor…

Yeah but there’s no reason to assume this is even a possibility. SW Companies that are making more money than ever are slashing their workforces. Those garbage Coke and McDonald’s commercials clearly show big industry is trying to normalize bad quality rather than elevate their output. In theory, cheap overseas tweening shops should have allowed the midcentury American cartoon industry to make incredible quality at the same price, but instead, there was a race straight to the bottom. I’d love to have even a shred of hope that the future you describe is possible but I see zero empirical evidence that anyone is even considering it.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#602

Post by mohsen1 »

simonw wrote: post #599

Took me a while to create the pelican because I was busy adding Opus/Sonnet 4.6 support to my plugin for https://llm.datasette.io/ - pelican now available here, it's not quite as good as the Opus 4.6 one but does look equivalent to the Opus 4.5 one - and it has a snazzy top hat. https://simonwillison.net/2026/Feb/17/claude-sonnet-46/

top hat was there in another attempt I saw in the comments here.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#603

Post by abraxas »

lukeinator42 wrote: post #510
extr wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My answer was (for which it did zero thinking and answered near-instantaneously): "Drive. You're going there to use water and machinery that require the car to be present. The question answers itself." I tried it 3 more times with extended thinking explicitly off: "Drive. You're going to a car wash." "Drive. You're washing the car, not yourself." "Drive. You're washing the car — it needs to be there." Guess they're s…

Same, I haven't been able to get gemini or claude to tell me to walk a single time and I've even tried changing the distance in the prompt, etc.

I get the Anthropic models to screw up consistently. Change the prefix. Say in the preamble that you are going after supper or something. Change the scenario eveey time. They are caching something across requests. Once you correct it, it fixes its response until you mess with the prompt again

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#604

Post by drivebyhooting »

cmiles8 wrote: post #595
alex43578 wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a middle road where AI replaces half the juniors or entry level roles, the interns and the bottom rung of the org chart. In marketing, an AI can effortlessly perform basic duties, write email copy, research, etc. Same goes for programming, graphic design, translation, etc. The results will be looked over by a senior member, but it’s already clear that a role with 3 YOE or less could easily be substituted with…

Not really though: 1. Companies like savings but they’re not dumb enough to just wipe out junior roles and shoot themselves in the foot for future generations of company leaders. Business leaders have been vocal on this point and saying it’s terrible thinking. 2. In the US and Europe the work most ripe for automation and AI was long since “offshored” to places like India. If AI does have an impact it will wipe out th…

As far as 1 goes, how do you explain American deindustrilization and e. g. its auto industry.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#605

Post by abraxas »

polotics wrote: post #528
jatari wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it is a trick question due to it being non-sensical. The AI is interpreting it in the only way that makes sense, the car is already at the car wash, should you take a 2nd car to the car wash 50 meters away or walk. It should just respond "this question doesn't make any sense, can you rephrase it or add additional information"

I disagree. It should I think answer with a simple clarifying question: Where is the car that you want to wash?

And even then it would point to a heavy skew towards American culture with the implicit assumption that there must be multiple cars in the household

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#606

Post by cesarvarela »

ManlyBread wrote: post #448

Still fails the car wash question, I took the prompt from the title of this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47031580 The answer was "Walk! It would be a bit counterproductive to drive a dirty car 50 meters just to get it washed — you'd barely move before arriving. Walking takes less than a minute, and you can simply drive it through the wash and walk back home afterward." I've tried several other variant…

This one is gonna be benchmaxed a lot.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#607

Post by josephg »

dakolli wrote: post #486
zmmmmm wrote: post #400

I see a big focus on computer use - you can tell they think there is a lot of value there and in truth it may be as big as coding if they convincingly pull it off. However I am still mystified by the safety aspect. They say the model has greatly improved resistance. But their own safety evaluation says 8% of the time their automated adversarial system was able to one-shot a successful injection takeover even with saf…

Their goal is to monopolize labor for anything that has to do with i/o on a computer, which is way more than SWE. Its simple, this technology literally cannot create new jobs it simply can cause one engineer (or any worker whos job has to do with computer i/o) to do the work of 3, therefore allowing you to replace workers (and overwork the ones you keep). Companies don't need "more work" half the "features"/"products…

> Its also worth noting that if you can create a business with an LLM, so can everyone else. And sadly everyone has the same ideas

Yeah, this is quite thought provoking. If computer code written by LLMs is a commodity, what new businesses does that enable? What can we do cheaply we couldn't do before?

One obvious answer is we can make a lot more custom stuff. Like, why buy Windows and Office when I can just ask claude to write me my own versions instead? Why run a commodity operating system on kiosks? We can make so many more one-off pieces of software.

The fact software has been so expensive to write over the last few decades has forced software developers to think a lot about how to collaborate. We reuse code as much as we can - in shared libraries, common operating systems & APIs, cloud services (eg AWS) and so on. And these solutions all come with downsides - like supply chain attacks, subscription fees and service outages. LLMs can let every project invent its own tree of dependencies. Which is equal parts great and terrifying.

There's that old line that businesses should "commoditise their compliment". If you're amazon, you want package delivery services to be cheap and competitive. If software is the commodity, what is the bespoke value-added service that can sit on top of all that?

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#608

Post by ProjectArcturis »

cmiles8 wrote: post #595
alex43578 wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a middle road where AI replaces half the juniors or entry level roles, the interns and the bottom rung of the org chart. In marketing, an AI can effortlessly perform basic duties, write email copy, research, etc. Same goes for programming, graphic design, translation, etc. The results will be looked over by a senior member, but it’s already clear that a role with 3 YOE or less could easily be substituted with…

Not really though: 1. Companies like savings but they’re not dumb enough to just wipe out junior roles and shoot themselves in the foot for future generations of company leaders. Business leaders have been vocal on this point and saying it’s terrible thinking. 2. In the US and Europe the work most ripe for automation and AI was long since “offshored” to places like India. If AI does have an impact it will wipe out th…

1. Sure they will! It's a prisoner's dilemma. Each individual company is incentivized to minimize labor costs. Who wants to be the company who pays extra for humans in junior roles and then gets that talent poached away?

2 Yes, absolutely.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.6

#609

Post by ACCount37 »

manmal wrote: post #237
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:/…

Codex warns me to renew API tokens if it ingests them (accidentally?). Opus starts the decompiler as soon as I ask it how this and that works in a closed binary.

Opus <3. My go-to for reverse engineering tasks.
Post reply on HN