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

Claude Opus 4.8

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#601

Post by avador »

NiloCK wrote: post #77

A rambling comment: I think this is the first time we've had a third minor version bump on a frontier Anthropic model. (I count the 0.5s as major here, because they've been issued non-sequentially and also corresponded to massive capability leaps, eg, Sonnet 3.5, Opus 4.5). So now the Opus 4.5 family has successors 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8, each posting fairly modest claimed gains. My own experience w/ 4.6 and 4.7 are that…

The inability to tell if a model is improving is, I think, a tell that the model has improved up to your level of programmatic (analytic, computational) capacity.

A lot of the information (blogs, tweelches, plosts) that I consume seems to be converging on the idea that we all depend on the models. However. It seems to me that the exact opposite is true. The models depend on us, and _desperately_ so.

There must have been stories, books, movies, made about this intellectual (and propositional, legal, factual) inversion.

The majority need the minority. Has always been the case, I now think. But what has newly developed is that the majority can take a dependency not on the minority, but on a select few companies who are abstracting and compressing the minority into latent spaces.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#602

Post by colechristensen »

elAhmo wrote: post #485
senko wrote: post #385

My fav coding benchmark for frontier models is to build a simple RTS game in one file (js/html/css). Claude Code with Opus 4.8 in ultracode mode nailed it, the best result so far: https://bsky.app/profile/senko.net/post/3mmwnrkwboc2v The prompt was: Create a simple but functional real time strategy (RTS) game similar to old WarCraft, StarCraft or Command & Conquer games. The player should be able to build buildings,…

What is ultracode mode?

Biases the model to solve problems with teams of agents

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#604

Post by ai_fry_ur_brain »

cesarvarela wrote: post #566
hereme888 wrote: post #544

Early ArtificialAnalysis.ai results show GPT 5.5 is still the better bang-for-your-buck. OpenAI solves tasks with about 50% less output tokens. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?intelligence=coding-index&int...

I give Codex a try with every new version, and we don't match, so this isn't true for everyone. Claude would need to be much more expensive for me to switch.

People be saying these things with certainity. 99% of the time one has just inspired more confidence through sycophancy, or just good varience in outputs for a session/prompt.

Slop heads be swearing by one slot machine one week and swearing it off the next like an addicted gambler describing their favorite slot machines from week to week.

This isn't a coincidence, these companies hire UX designers from mobile gaming and online gambling to help engineer their addictiveness.

Its all in your head, and the output is no matter what always going to be worse than learning how to do something yourself and putting care into it.

Handmade watches > mass manufactured watches. There's nothing special about the skills needed for the guy who runs a conveyer belt at a watch manufacturer in China. The watch made by the guy who makes one watch a month in Switzerland is prized and beloved.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#607

Post by walthamstow »

eminence32 wrote: post #548
simonw wrote: post #73

I generated pelicans riding bicycles on both thinking level low and thinking level high: https://gist.github.com/simonw/68560eddb0b268a8417f80ceb7304... The high one is notably better - the bicycle frame is the correct shape, unlike thinking level low. For comparison, here's Opus 4.7: https://gist.github.com/simonw/afcb19addf3f38eb1996e1ebe749c...

I bet someone shares this link every time you post about bicycles, but since I didn't see anyone share it yet in this thread, I'll take the opportunity to do so: https://www.gianlucagimini.it/portfolio-item/velocipedia/ Turns out even humans can be pretty bad at drawing bicycles :)

On a new model release, you can guarantee two things are in the replies to Simon. One is your link, the other is "surely the models are being trained on this now"

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#608

Post by AussieWog93 »

827a wrote: post #394

Frontier models are mostly past the point of human ability to discern whether they are actually better or worse than predecessors and competitors. I suspect the benchmarks may also be saturated, or at least past their usefulness. I personally feel that Anthropic doesn't understand what this means for the frontier labs, and moreover that they might be the only frontier lab that doesn't. 1. Google dropped Gemini 3.5 Fl…

>Frontier models are mostly past the point of human ability to discern whether they are actually better or worse than predecessors and competitors.

Yeah nah, the models' flaws are pretty obvious when you use them. And as a user, you can absolutely know when a flaw disappears or barrier is cleared.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#610

Post by stainablesteel »

i'm beginning to find it comical how every model release always presents itself as superior to every other model on the market, but they always leave just one test where some other model was modestly better, just in case.
Post reply on HN