Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 4.7

anthropic.com

811–820 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#811

I can't notice any difference to 4.6 from 3 weeks ago, except that this model burns way more tokens, and produces much longer plans. To me it seem like this model is just the same as 4.6 but with a bigger token budget on all effort levels. I guess this is one way how Anthropic plans to make their business profitable. During the past weeks of lobotomized opus, I tried a few different open weight models side by side wi…

Which open weights model?

It goes to a different school, you wouldn't know if

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#814
post #463

They've increased their cybersecurity usage filters to the point that Opus 4.7 refuses to work on any valid work, even after web fetching the program guidelines itself and acknowledging "This is authorized research under the [Redacted] Bounty program, so the findings here are defensive research outputs, not malware. I'll analyze and draft, not weaponize anything beyond what's needed to prove the bug to [Redacted]. I…

Sounds like you will need to drink a(n identity) verification can soon [1] to continue as a security researcher on their platform. 1: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14328960-identity-ver... Identity verification on Claude Being responsible with powerful technology starts with knowing who is using it. Identity verification helps us prevent abuse, enforce our usage policies, and comply with legal obligations. W…

> Being responsible with powerful technology starts with knowing who is using it.

What asinine slop. As a frontier model creator, responsibility should start far before they're signing up customers.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#815

> We stated that we would keep Claude Mythos Preview’s release limited and test new cyber safeguards on less capable models first. Opus 4.7 is the first such model: its cyber capabilities are not as advanced as those of Mythos Preview (indeed, during its training we experimented with efforts to differentially reduce these capabilities). We are releasing Opus 4.7 with safeguards that automatically detect and block req…

This is a price discrimination/upsell strategy. Sure, if you just want software, use our public model. Don’t worry; it’s safe.

But if you want your model to be secure, and you want to deal with dangerous stuff, contact us for pricing. BTW if you don’t pay for us to pentest you, maybe someone else will, idk.

Oh also you’re not allowed to pentest yourself with our public models anymore because it looks like hacking

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#816
post #674

> We stated that we would keep Claude Mythos Preview’s release limited and test new cyber safeguards on less capable models first. Opus 4.7 is the first such model: its cyber capabilities are not as advanced as those of Mythos Preview (indeed, during its training we experimented with efforts to differentially reduce these capabilities). We are releasing Opus 4.7 with safeguards that automatically detect and block req…

The fundamental tension is that the models are getting weirdly good at hacking while still sort of sucking at a bunch of economically valuable tasks. So they've hit the point where the models are simultaneously too smart (dangerous hacking abilities) and too stupid (can't actually replace most employees). So at this point they need to make the models bigger, but they're already too big. So the only thing left to do i…

They are training them on decompilation and reverse engineering/blackbox reimplementations/pentesting because it’s one of the best ways to generate interesting and rare RL traces for agentic coding AND teach them how lots of things work under the hood.

Just throw Claude at millions of binaries and you can get amazing training data. Oh wait 4.7 gives you refusals for that now

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#818

I can't notice any difference to 4.6 from 3 weeks ago, except that this model burns way more tokens, and produces much longer plans. To me it seem like this model is just the same as 4.6 but with a bigger token budget on all effort levels. I guess this is one way how Anthropic plans to make their business profitable. During the past weeks of lobotomized opus, I tried a few different open weight models side by side wi…

[deleted]

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#819

They've increased their cybersecurity usage filters to the point that Opus 4.7 refuses to work on any valid work, even after web fetching the program guidelines itself and acknowledging "This is authorized research under the [Redacted] Bounty program, so the findings here are defensive research outputs, not malware. I'll analyze and draft, not weaponize anything beyond what's needed to prove the bug to [Redacted]. I…

It has been the same for Sonnet/Opus 4.6 for sometime. It will straight up refuse to work on anything in the grey area. Chinese models will happily do anything; On my tests, GLM 5.1 comfortably bypassed a multi-player game's anti-piracy/anti-cheats check with some guided steering.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#820

They've increased their cybersecurity usage filters to the point that Opus 4.7 refuses to work on any valid work, even after web fetching the program guidelines itself and acknowledging "This is authorized research under the [Redacted] Bounty program, so the findings here are defensive research outputs, not malware. I'll analyze and draft, not weaponize anything beyond what's needed to prove the bug to [Redacted]. I…

It’s to stop you from getting RL traces or using Claude without paying the big bucks for the Enterprise Security version

I really like Anthropic models and the company mission but I personally believe this is anticompetitive, or at least, anti user.

If they are going to turn into a protection racket I’ll just do RL black boxing/pentesting on Chinese models or with Codex, and since I know Anthropic is compute constrained I’ll just put the traces on huggingface so everybody else can do it too.

I just want to pay them for their RL’d tensor thingies it but if their business plan is to hoard the tokens or only sell it to certain people, they are literally part of every other security conscious person’s threat model.

Post reply on HN