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

With such a huge leap, i’m confused why they didn’t call it Sonnet 5? As someone who uses Sonnet 4.5 for 95% tasks due to costs, i’m pretty excited to try 4.6 at the same price

It'd be a bit weird to have the Sonnet numbering ahead of the Opus numbering. The Opus 4.5->4.6 change was a little more incremental (from my perspective at least, I haven't been paying attention to benchmark numbers), so I think the Opus numbering makes sense.

Sonnet numbering has been weirder in the past.

Opus 3.5 was scrapped even though Sonnet 3.5 and Haiku 3.5 were released.

Not to mention Sonnet 3.7 (while Opus was still on version 3)

Shameless source: https://sajarin.com/blog/modeltree/


I like this tree visualization! The background with little squares is making the text difficult to read, though.

Maybe they're numbering the models based on internal architecture/codebase revisions and Sonnet 4.6 was trained using the 4.6 tooling, which didn't change enough to warrant 5?

i like how Anthropic has positioned themselves as the true AI research company and donating “standards” like that.

Although Skills are just md files but it’s good to see them “donate” it.

There goal seems to be simple: Focus on coding and improving it. They’ve found a great niche and hopefully revenue generating business there.

OpenAI on the other hand doesn’t give me same vibes, they don’t seem very oriented. They’re playing catchup with both Google models and Anthropic


I have no idea why I’m about to defend OpenAI here. BUT OpenAI have released some open weight models like gpt-oss and whisper. But sure open weight not open source. And yeah I really don’t like OpenAI as a company to be clear.


They have but it does feel like they are developing a closed platform aka Apple.

Apple has shortcuts, but they haven’t propped it up like a standard that other people can use.

To contrast this is something you can use even if you have nothing to do with Claude, and your tools created will be compatible with the wider ecosystem.


A skill can also contain runnable code.

Many many MCPs could and should just be a skill instead.


For the past week, I’m working on creating device with a screen to show my indian parents if i’m in a meeting or not. So they don’t trouble me and come in my room unannounced when im in a meeting.

It’s build using ESP32 and a small screen which shows On and Off and the time till meeting is over. I learnt Fusion 360 and designed a small snap fit case and got it 3d printed.

I have a small electron app running in my mac os system tray which connect to esp using BLE and it also checks if Mac Camera is in use (using Apple logs) and then communicate it with the device.

Calling it Door Frame. Had quite fun making it as i learnt 3d design, c++ code using Platform IO and other fun stuff. Even designed a small binary protocol to exchange data over BLE


Wouldn't it be easier to just install a bolt lock on your door?


Easier, sure? More fun? Probably not.


You could use a WiFi power switch to turn on a light outside the door.


i hate the new pattern of using these magic strings everywhere. “use workflow”, “use client”, etc etc.

I don’t like having custom bundler logic for my code.


Custom bundler + telemetry already included. Smells way too much like Microsoft, too much like lock-in with a deal that gets worse and worse.


"don't use next"

"don't use react"


Please, bundling React with Next is completely foolish. React is open, battle-hardened, type safe, and well-documented, while Next is... a vendor lock-in trojan horse targeting low-knowledge developers with concepts that seem beginner-friendly.

I can understand making legit criticisms of React, no doubt the hooks transition had some issues and the library has a high level of complexity without a clear winner in the state management domain, but pretending React is peddling shit like "use workflow" is frankly low effort.


Just shows you how absolutely little people know about the web ecosystem - most people heard something once or twice from someone else and just assume its true - to make matters worse, you have the typical HN "vanilla html and js only!!!" bandwagon which, if you try to use for any serious web application will only lead you down a path of much pain and suffering. I've commented many times in many other threads that I just don't get it; I probably never will.


Mate, don't get mad at us just because you can't code without a framework.

React was created to make low skilled people capable of shipping low quality code. If that is the only thing you can do, I'd be careful about calling yourself fullstackchris


Mate, real programmers use assembly.


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

Search: