Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | xvector's commentslogin

Pretty sure that was a bug, I had the same issue but updating fixed it

Rose tinted glasses

Nah, until recently i still had access via web chat interface, and often paste a transcript and files for somethong 4.7 keeps fucking up, paste response into files as appropriate, and attempt to continue with 4.7.

I swear 4.6+ looks for reasons to ask clarifying questions sometimes, even when really not required, and this fucks flow/quality up in a big way.

I just wish there was a "im not stupid" checkbox you can use to get a minimalistic interference access to claude. Im starting to use local models again, which I havent in a while because claude was so much better, but once i fully lose access to 4.5 it might be time to go back to fully local for good. 4.6+ fails to add value for me, projects 4.5- did good jobs on first try now require multiple prompts and feedback. Exact same initial prompt and project files extracted from archive. I liked claude because it aced those tests while local required handholding. Now claude requires handholding, so why use it over local? Once 4.5 leaves openrouter it might just be time.


4.5 was clearly better than .6 and .7. Like, clear as day.

.6 is some sort of quantized or distilled .5 with a bit more RL, and the current .5 is that same cost reduced model without the extra RL.


Spent a lot of time with "open models." None of them come close. They are benchmaxxed. But you won't hear many of the open model fans on HN admit this.

The open model mentality is also just so bizarre to me. You're going to use an inferior model to save, what, a couple hundred bucks a month? Is your time really worth that little?

No one working on a serious project at a serious company is downgrading their agent's intelligence for a marginal cost saving. Downgrading your model is like downgrading the toilet paper on your yacht.


> The open model mentality is also just so bizarre to me. You're going to use an inferior model to save, what, a couple hundred bucks a month? Is your time really worth that little?

I agree that people who claim that open models are as good as claude/openai/z are lying, delusional, or not doing very much. I've tried them all, included GLM 5.1.

GLM is not bad but the hardware needed will never recoup the ROI vs just using a commercial provider through its API.

That being said, you're being reductive here. For many use cases local models offer advantages that can't obtained through a commercial API : Privacy, ownership of the entire stack, predictability. They can't be rugpulled, they can't snitch on you. They will not give you 503.

Those advantages are very valuable for things like a local assistant, as an agent, for data extraction, for translations, for games (role playing and whatnot), etc.

That being said I know that many people are like you, they don't give a second thought about privacy. They'd plug Anthropic to their brain if they could. So I understand the sentiment. I just think that you should in turn try to understand why someone would use an open model.


Glm 5.1 getting 5% on ARC-AGI 2 private is all anyone needs to know.

The cost is so small relative to the increase. The cost whining on HN is bizarre to me. Feels like everyone here is on an individual plan and has no understanding of what margins look like for actual business.

Meta pays $750k+ TC and makes far more profit/eng, do you think they care about $5k/eng/mo in inference? A 1.1x increase would be so significant that it would justify the cost easily, especially when you can just compress comps to make up for it


Nobody is whining here.

What? You don't think businesses do financial planning and calculations for profit margins?

Do you really think they go on vibes - "welp, this AI thing seems to improve developer performance, I guess. Heck, what's an extra 5k per developer anyways, amirite".

Well, maybe they really do in your neck of the woods. Explains a lot, I guess.


Yes most companies do in fact operate like this. There are tens of thousands of companies that will pay more for the best thing and call it at that, because the cost is dwarfed by what even marginal gains in quality unlock for the business.

> the cost is dwarfed by what even marginal gains in quality

That is just, like, your opinion, man.

Also, I doubt these kinds of companies have "quality" of anything, never mind "gains in quality".


I too am finding 4.7 a significant upgrade, it's hard to go back to 4.6 for me. I don't understand everyone calling it a disappointment but clowning on Anthropic is the trendy move these days.

And what's missing in all these token count complaints is that 4.7 is actually cheaper overall anyways because it produces fewer output tokens.


HN is getting ridiculous. You cannot seriously be complaining about Opus token usage on the Pro plan.

Compared to the usage you get on OpenAI's $20 plan tho?

Adaptive thinking is optional

Not when you want extended thinking - you select extended thinking and opus decides if you get it with apativenthinking.

"With Opus 4.6, extended thinking was a toggle you managed: turn it on for hard stuff, off for quick stuff. If you left it on, every question paid the thinking tax whether it needed to or not. Now, with Opus 4.7, extended thinking becomes adaptive thinking. "

https://claude.com/resources/tutorials/working-with-claude-o...


...are you talking about the app? Come on. The app is for quick queries. You should be using Claude Code or Cowork.

I've gotten quite a bit of work done on claude.ai and the mobile app though. It's been good for code review. The GitHub connector is a bit clunky but it works.

No, it is not.

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/model-config

> Opus 4.7 always uses adaptive reasoning. The fixed thinking budget mode and CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADAPTIVE_THINKING do not apply to it.


This is just a case of mass social psychosis. Claude is the same as it has ever been. Just look at historical benchmarks: https://marginlab.ai/trackers/claude-code-historical-perform...

This mindset trivializes the immense achievements of "the common man" over the course of millennia.

Many of those achievements were achieved through physical violence. The 5-day work week, for example. We don't work 7 days because people kept shooting bosses until the bosses agreed to compromise on 5 days.

We'd have never progressed as a species with your mentality. Change is painful and it's part and parcel of progress.

Humans would be suffering far more today if we weren't willing to accept short term pains for progress.


> We'd have never progressed as a species with your mentality.

Please avoid swipes like this on HN. The guidelines make it clear we're trying for something better here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html


Change and progress like the people of France deciding they had enough of injustice and nobles' impunity, then? A little short-term pain for social progress? We agree.

Look where France is now. Can't afford their own retirement.

If that's the worst problem they have, that still sounds like things worked out pretty well compared to most places.

That sounds suspiciously like a "ends justify the means" argument.

It's easy to say we need to be willing to accept short term pains when it's someone else who has to bear the brunt of them.


Are you willing to stand by this argument and give up your career?

Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: