Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic.com

681–690 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#681
post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This underestimates how much of the Internet is actually compressed into and is an integral part of the model's weights. Gemini 2.5 can recite the first Harry Potter book verbatim for over 75% of the book.

I'm getting astrology when I search for this. Any links on this?

Iirc it's not quite true. 75% of the book is more likely to appear than you would expect by chance if prompted with the prior tokens. This suggests that it has the book encoded in its weights, but you can't actually recover it by saying "recite harry potter for me".

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#682

Here's one I've been using for awhile. The 'smarter' LLMs will overconfidently spit out 7. The dumber ones ask for more info. Opus 4.6 fails. A round drink coaster with a diameter of 9 sits between a beer glass and a wood table. The glass has a wall thickness of 1. What is the inner diameter of the glass?

[deleted]

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#683

Here's one I've been using for awhile. The 'smarter' LLMs will overconfidently spit out 7. The dumber ones ask for more info. Opus 4.6 fails. A round drink coaster with a diameter of 9 sits between a beer glass and a wood table. The glass has a wall thickness of 1. What is the inner diameter of the glass?

Minimax M2.1:

The inner diameter of the glass is *7*.

Here's the reasoning: - The coaster (diameter 9) sits between the glass and table, meaning the glass sits directly on the coaster - This means the *outer diameter of the glass equals the coaster diameter = 9* - The glass has a wall thickness of 1 on each side - *Inner diameter = Outer diameter - 2 × wall thickness* - Inner diameter = 9 - 2(1) = 9 - 2 = *7*

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini 3 Pro gives me this: > Based on the information provided, it is impossible to determine the inner diameter of the glass. Here is why: The Coaster Dimension: Knowing the coaster has a diameter of 9 only tells us the size of the object under the glass. It does not mean the glass is the same size; the glass could be smaller (fitting entirely on the coaster) or larger (overhanging the coaster). The Glass Dimension…

GPT 5.2 Chat: > There isn’t enough information to determine the inner diameter *for sure*. All we’re told is: - The coaster has a diameter of 9. - The glass sits on the coaster. - The glass wall thickness is 1. Nothing explicitly states that the *outer diameter of the glass equals the coaster’s diameter*. The glass could be smaller than the coaster, which is very common. *However*, if we make the usual implicit assum…

Opus 4.6 Extended thinking:

```

Finding the Inner Diameter The coaster sits beneath the glass on the table, meaning the glass rests on top of it. Assuming the coaster matches the outer diameter of the glass base:

Outer diameter of glass = diameter of coaster = 9 Wall thickness = 1 (on each side, so subtract twice)

dinner=9−2(1)=7d_{\text{inner}} = 9 - 2(1) = 7dinner =9−2(1)=7 The inner diameter of the glass is 7.

```

Makes its assumption clear, seems reasonable?

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#686

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…

> It’s very plausible (and increasingly likely) that OpenAI/Anthropic are profitable on a per-token marginal basis There any many places that will not use models running on hardware provided by OpenAI / Anthropic. That is the case true of my (the Australian) government at all levels. They will only use models running in Australia. Consequently AWS (and I presume others) will run models supplied by the AI companies fo…

> Consequently AWS (and I presume others) will run models supplied by the AI companies for you in their data centres. They won't be doing that at a loss, so the price will cover marginal cost of the compute plus renting the model.

This says absolutely nothing.

Extremely simplified example: let's say Sonnet 4.5 really costs $17/1M output for AWS to run yet it's priced at $15. Anthropic will simply have a contract with AWS that compensates them. That, or AWS is happy to take the loss. You said "they won't be doing that at a loss" but in this case it's not at all out of the question.

Whatever the case, that it costs the same on AWS as directly from Anthropic is not an indicator of unit economics.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#687
Wow, I have been using Open 4.6 and for the last 15 minutes, and it's already made two extremely stupid mistakes... like misunderstanding basic instructions and editing the file in a very silly, basic way. Pretty bad. Never seen this with any model before.

The one bone I'll throw it was that I was asking it to edit its own MCP configs. So maybe it got thoroughly confused?

I dunno what's going on, I'm going to give it the night. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#688
post #560
post #482

Just tested the new Opus 4.6 (1M context) on a fun needle-in-a-haystack challenge: finding every spell in all Harry Potter books. All 7 books come to ~1.75M tokens, so they don't quite fit yet. (At this rate of progress, mid-April should do it ) For now you can fit the first 4 books (~733K tokens). Results: Opus 4.6 found 49 out of 50 officially documented spells across those 4 books. The only miss was "Slugulus Eruc…

There's lots of websites that list the spells. It's well documented. Could Claude simply be regurgitating knowledge from the web? Example: https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_spells

Hmm… maybe he could switch out all the spells names slightly different ones and see how that goes

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#689

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.

You mean Claude sucks at Czech. You're extrapolating here. I can name languages that Claude is better at than GPT.

Gemini is the most fluent in the highest number of human languages and has been for years (!) at this point - namely since Gemini 1.5 Pro, which was released Feb 2024. Two years ago.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#690
post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can get the same result just asking opus/gpt, it is probably internalized knowledge from reddit or similar sites.

If you just ask it you don't get the same result. Around 13 spells were missing when I just prompted Opus 4.6 without the books as context.

because it is non-deterministic, i just did and got 50 spells.

prompt: finding every spell in all Harry Potter books in the first 4 books, only the officially documented spells across those 4 books, there are 50, without using websearch

Here's my best compilation from memory, organized by book. I'll be upfront: getting to exactly 50 is tricky without cross-referencing, so some might be debatable or I might miss a couple. Here goes:

---

*Book 1 - Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone*

1. *Lumos* - produces light 2. *Nox* - extinguishes Lumos 3. *Alohomora* - unlocks doors 4. *Wingardium Leviosa* - levitation 5. *Petrificus Totalus* - full body-bind 6. *Locomotor Mortis* - leg-locker curse 7. *Incendio* - produces fire 8. *Reparo* - mends broken objects

*Book 2 - Chamber of Secrets*

9. *Expelliarmus* - disarms opponent 10. *Rictusempra* - tickling charm 11. *Tarantallegra* - forces target to dance 12. *Serpensortia* - conjures a snake 13. *Finite Incantatem* - ends spell effects 14. *Obliviate* - erases memories 15. *Aparecium* - reveals invisible ink 16. *Immobulus* - freezes target in place 17. *Homorphus* - mentioned by Lockhart (werewolf cure claim) 18. *Peskipiksi Pesternomi* - Lockhart's failed pixie spell

*Book 3 - Prisoner of Azkaban*

19. *Expecto Patronum* - produces a Patronus 20. *Riddikulus* - repels a Boggart 21. *Waddiwasi* - shoots objects at target 22. *Impervius* - waterproofing charm 23. *Dissendium* - opens secret passage 24. *Ferula* - conjures bandages/splint 25. *Mobilicorpus* - moves a body 26. *Lumos Maxima* - intense light

*Book 4 - Goblet of Fire*

27. *Accio* - summoning charm 28. *Avada Kedavra* - killing curse 29. *Crucio* - Cruciatus curse (torture) 30. *Imperio* - Imperius curse (control) 31. *Stupefy* - stunning spell 32. *Engorgio* - enlarges target 33. *Reducio* - shrinks target 34. *Sonorus* - amplifies voice 35. *Quietus* - reverses Sonorus 36. *Morsmordre* - conjures the Dark Mark 37. *Priori Incantatem* - reveals last spell cast 38. *Deletrius* - erases magical residue 39. *Densaugeo* - enlarges teeth 40. *Furnunculus* - causes boils 41. *Impedimenta* - slows/stops target 42. *Reducto* - blasts solid objects 43. *Diffindo* - severing charm 44. *Relashio* - releases sparks/grip 45. *Orchideous* - conjures flowers 46. *Avis* - conjures birds 47. *Point Me* - Four-Point Spell (compass) 48. *Ennervate* - revives stunned person 49. *Protego* - shield charm 50. *Conjunctivitis Curse* - affects eyesight (Krum on the dragon)

---

A few caveats: some of these (like Lumos Maxima, Homorphus, Peskipiksi Pesternomi) are borderline since they're either mentioned rather than properly cast, or might be film additions that bleed into memory. The Conjunctivitis Curse is described but its incantation isn't explicitly given in the text. And Protego might technically first appear with its incantation in Book 5 during DA practice rather than Book 4.

If you want, I can turn this into a spreadsheet or document with columns for spell name, effect, who casts it, and which chapter.

Post reply on HN