Just used Opus 4.6 via GitHub Copilot. It feels very different. Inference seems slow for now. I guess Opus 4.6 has adaptive thinking activated by default.
Claude Opus 4.6
751–760 of 1001 posts
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#752Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paying $10 per request doesn't have me jumping at the opportunity to try it!
Makes me wonder: do employees at Anthropic get unmetered access to Claude models?
Boris Cherny, creator of Claude Code, posted about how he used Claude a month ago. He’s got half a dozen Opus sessions on the burners constantly. So yes, I expect it’s unmetered.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#753Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they still are subsidizing inference costs. They are for sure subsidising costs on all you can prompt packages (20-100-200$ /mo). They do that for data gathering mostly, and at a smaller degree for user retention. > evidence at all that Anthropic or OpenAI is able to make money on inference yet. You can infer that from what 3rd party inference providers are charging. The largest open models atm are dsv3 (~650B para…
most of those subscriptions go unused. I barely use 10% of mine so my unused tokens compensate for the few heavy users
Ive been thinking about our company, one of big global conglomerates that went for copilot. Suddenly I was just enrolled.. together with at least 1500 others. I guess the amount of money for our business copilot plans x 1500 is not a huge amount of money, but I am at least pretty convinced that only a small part of users use even 10% of their quota. Even teams located around me, I only know of 1 person that seems to use it actively.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#754They are also giving away $50 extra pay as you go credit to try Opus 4.6. I just claimed it from the web usage page[1]. Are they anticipating higher token usage for the model or just want to promote the usage? [1] https://claude.ai/settings/usage
Damn this is awesome. I have some heavy PRs to crunch through.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#755Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s so simple about it?
I said relatively simple. It is mostly an API interface with Anthropic models, with tool calling on top of it, very simple input and output.
If I would get a dollar each time a developer (or CTO!) told me "this is (relatively) simple, it will take 2 days/weeks", but then it actually took 2 years+ to fully build and release a product that has more useful features than bugs...
I am not protecting anthropic[0], but how come in this forum every day I still see these "it's simple" takes from experienced people - I have no idea. There are who knows how many terminal emulators out there, with who knows how many different configurations. There are plugins for VSCode and various other editors (so it's not only TUI).
Looking at issue tracker ~1/3 of issues are seemingly feature requests[1].
Do not forget we are dealing with LLMs and it's a tool, which purpose and selling point that it codes on ANY computer in ANY language for ANY system. It's very popular tool run each day by who knows how many people - I could easily see, how such "relatively simple" tool would rack up thousands of issues, because "CC won't do weird thing X, for programming language Y, while I run from my terminal Z". And because it's LLM - theres whole can of non deterministic worms.
Have you created an LLM agent, especially with moderately complex tool usage? If yes and it worked flawlessly - tell your secrets (and get hired by Anthropic/ChatGPT/etc). Probably 80% of my evergrowing code was trying to just deal with unknown unknowns - what if LLM invokes tool wrong? How to guide LLM back on track? How to protect ourselves and keep LLM on track if prompts are getting out of hand or user tries to do something weird? The problems were endless...
Yes the core is "simple", but it's extremely deep can of worms, for such successful tool - I easily could see how there are many issues.
Also super funny, that first issue for me at the moment is how user cannot paste images when it has Korean language input (also issue description is in Korean) and second issue is about input problems in Windows Powershell and CMD, which is obviously total different world compared to POSIX (???) terminal emulators.
[0] I have very adverse feelings for mega ultra wealthy VC moneys...
[1] https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues?q=is%3Aissu...
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#756This is the first model to which I send my collection of nearly 900 poems and an extremely simple prompt (in Portuguese), and it manages to produce an impeccable analysis of the poems, as a (barely) cohesive whole, which span 15 years. It does not make a single mistake, it identifies neologisms, hidden meaning, 7 distinct poetic phases, recurring themes, fragments/heteronyms, related authors. It has left me completel…
Could you please post the key poems? Would love to read them.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#757Earlier quoted context omitted.
Claude is by far the most popular and best assistant currently available for a developer.
Okay, and Windows is by far the most popular desktop operating system. Discussions are pointless when the parties are talking past each other.
Yeah, but there are dozens of AI coding assistants to choose from, and the cost to switch is very low, unlike switching operating systems.
I've tried them all and I keep coming back to Claude Code because it's just so much more capable and useful than the others.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#758I'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…
Their "constitution" is just garbage meant to defend them ripping off copyrighted material with the excuse that "it's not plagiarizing, it thinks!!!!1" which is, false.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#759What I’d love is some small model specializing in reading long web pages, and extracting the key info. Search fills the context very quickly, but if a cheap subagent could extract the important bits that problem might be reduced.
So send off haiku subtasks and have them come back with the results.
Re: Claude Opus 4.6
#760Just 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…
use AI to rewrite all the spells from all the books, then try to see if AI can detect the rewritten ones. This will ensure it's not pulling from it's trained data set.
That won't help. The AI replacing them will probably miss the same ones as the AI finding them.