Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 4.6

anthropic.com

701–710 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#701
post #363

Does anyone with more insight into the AI/LLM industry happen to know if the cost to run them in normal user-workflows is falling? The reason I'm asking is because "agent teams" while a cool concept, it largely constrained by the economics of running multiple LLM agents (i.e. plans/API calls that make this practical at scale are expensive). A year or more ago, I read that both Anthropic and OpenAI were losing money o…

> A year or more ago, I read that both Anthropic and OpenAI were losing money on every single request even for their paid subscribers, and I don't know if that has changed with more efficient hardware/software improvements/caching. This is obviously not true, you can use real data and common sense. Just look up a similar sized open weights model on openrouter and compare the prices. You'll note the similar sized mode…

To borrow a concept of cloud server renting, there's also the factor of overselling. Most open source LLM operators probably oversell quite a bit - they don't scale up resources as fast as OpenAI/Anthropic when requests increase. I notice many openrouter providers are noticeably faster during off hours.

In other words, it's not just the model size, but also concurrent load and how many gpus do you turn on at any time. I bet the big players' cost is quite a bit higher than the numbers on openrouter, even for comparable model parameters.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#702
post #615

> We build Claude with Claude. How long before the "we" is actually a team of agents?

Starting today maybe? https://code.claude.com/docs/en/agent-teams

I tried teams, good way to burn all your tokens in a matter of minutes.

It seems that the Claude Code team has not properly taught Claude how to use teams effectively.

One of the biggest problems I saw with it is that Claude assumes team members are like a real worker, where once they finish a task they should immediately be given the next task. What should really happen is once they finish a task they should be terminated and a new agent should be spawned for the next task.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#703
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…

The top comment is about finding basterized latin words from childrens books. The future is here.

> basterized

And yet, it's still somewhat better than the Hacker News comment using bastardized English words.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#704
Is anyone noticing reduced token consumption with Opus 4.6? This could be a release thing, but it would be interesting to observe see how it pans out once the hype cools off.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#705
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft's products are also extremely successful they're also total garbage

Claude is by far the most popular and best assistant currently available for a developer.

might be only among most popular. https://skills.sh/ is some data point.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#707
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CC has >6000 open issues, despite their bot auto-culling them after 60 days of inactivity. It was ~5800 when I looked just a few days ago so they seem to be accelerating towards some kind of bug singularity.

Just anecdotally, each release seems to be buggier than the last. To me, their claim that they are vibe coding Claude code isn’t the flex they think it is. I find it harder and harder to trust anthropic for business related use and not just hobby tinkering. Between buggy releases, opaque and often seemingly glitches rate limits and usage limits, and the model quality inconsistency, it’s just not something I’d want to…

Since version 2.1.9, performance has degraded significantly after extended use. After 30-40 prompts with substantial responses, memory usage climbs above 25GB, making the tool nearly unusable. I'm updating again to see if it improves.

Unlike what another commenter suggested, this is a complex tool. I'm curious whether the codebase might eventually reach a point where it becomes unfixable; even with human assistance. That would be an interesting development. We'll see.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well this is extremely disappointing to say the least.

It says "subscription users do not have access to Opus 4.6 1M context at launch" so they are probably planning to roll it out to subscription users too.

I do not trust that, similar working was used when Sonnet 1M launched. Still not the case today.

Re: Claude Opus 4.6

#709
post #38
post #17

> We build Claude with Claude. Our engineers write code with Claude Code every day well that explains quite a bit

CC has >6000 open issues, despite their bot auto-culling them after 60 days of inactivity. It was ~5800 when I looked just a few days ago so they seem to be accelerating towards some kind of bug singularity.

The rate of Issues opened on a popular repo is at least one order of magnitude beyond the number of Issues whoever is able to deal with them can handle.
Post reply on HN