8 ms·

Anthropic hires OpenAI co-founder Durk Kingma

162 points by coloneltcb 2y ago

nuz 2y ago
It's exciting to wonder where Anthropic will be in like 5 years time with this incredible momentum
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  Where society will be...
- infinitezest 2y ago
  Let's catch up about this together while we're waiting in the breadline.
ulfw 2y ago
Left door, right door
Alupis 2y ago
> Anthropic’s CEO, Dario Amodei, was once the VP of research at OpenAI, and reportedly split with the firm after a disagreement over OpenAI’s roadmap — namely its growing commercial focus. So he's now the CEO of Anthropic, a company selling AI services? Claude is amazing, and we use it's Teams plan here at the office extensively (having switched from ChatGPT since Claude is vastly better at technical material and adcopy writing). But, Anthropic definitely has a commercial motive... no? I'm not saying a commercial motive is a bad thing - hardly... but this quote seems to be odd given the circumstances.
- _boffin_ 2y ago
  Can you go into more depth why you believe Claude is better @ creating adcopy
  - Alupis 2y ago
    In my experience it is better at not sounding like an LLM wrote it, even without being directed to not sound like an LLM. It's better able to find and maintain the desired tone (playfulness, silly, professional, a mixture of, etc) with minor prompting. It also seems better at understanding your business/company and helping craft adcopy that's on-message/theme. We used ChatGPT's Teams plan too with GPT4, but were sold on Claude almost immediately. Admittedly we have not used GPT4o recently, so we can't compare. With technical information, Claude is vastly better at providing accurate information, even about lesser-known languages/stacks. For example, it's ability to discuss and review code written in Gleam, Svelte, TypeSpec and others is impressive. It is also, in our experience, vastly better at "guided/exploratory learning" - where you probe questions as you go down a rabbit hole. Is it always accurate? Of course not, but we've found it to be on average better at those tasks than ChatGPT.
- bbor 2y ago
  You're absolutely correct that they're a for-profit firm, but you're missing that they were founded specifically over safety concerns. Basically it's not just "commercial motive" in general, it's the sense that OpenAI was only paying lipservice to safety work as a marketing move. For example, here's their research mission: https://www.anthropic.com/research https://www.anthropic.com/research And an example of one of their early research focuses, Constitutional AI: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08073 https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08073
- Mistletoe 2y ago
  At least Anthropic is honest about their intentions though. That would be enough for me to leave OpenAI. Hey you want to commercialize it sure but don’t hide behind lies.
- blitzar 2y ago
  Pivoting from "for all mankind" to "all for myself" would make me deeply uncomfortable, too. The change from one position to the other, not either position in any absolute sense, is the concerning part.
  - ygjb 2y ago
    I think that the approach that Anthropic is taking to governance is a little different than "all for myself", it's worth having a read of https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-long-term-benefit-trust https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-long-term-benefit-trust It sounds like they are least trying to build on the notion of being a public benefit corporation, and create a business that won't devolve into chart must go up and to the right each quarter. Time will tell of course, OpenAI was putatively started with good, non-profit intentions.
    - freejazz 2y ago
      Does anyone actually believe any of this horsesh*t?
  - bbor 2y ago
    This is also a great point. I ranted at length about this when the OpenAI news broke last week, but to cut it short: it's a little troubling to see the company founded on the ethos "for-profit AI work is incredibly dangerous" transition to a for-profit AI firm openly engaged in an arms race. Not just engaged, inciting... https://web.archive.org/web/20230714043611/https://openai.com/charter https://web.archive.org/web/20230714043611/https://openai.co...
  - nurettin 2y ago
    > Pivoting from "for all mankind" to "all for myself" Isn't the former already a red flag?
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      No it’s good to try to build tech that helps people. Doesn’t mean such declarations need to be taken at face value, but being baseline-cynical is generally unwarranted, undesirable, and uninteresting.
- TiredOfLife 2y ago
  As I understand the main disagreement between OpenAI and Anthropic is exactly how much and what is censored.
  - CaptainFever 2y ago
    I'm not sure as to what Anthropic means when they mean safety. I remember them doing good, non-censorship work in this field, but I also pay for ChatGPT instead of Claude because Claude is just so censored and boring.
    - jacobr1 2y ago
      Where is Claude more censored than ChatGPT?
      - CaptainFever 2y ago
        For my use-cases, mostly erotica.
- heroprotagonist 2y ago
  I don't think it's odd. * Acting in accordance with declared motivations is a demonstration of integrity. * Acting towards hidden motivations that oppose your declared motivations is deceptive action. Honest people don't want to lead and be responsible for deceptive action, even if the action is desirable. For these types of people, it is often better to leave a place that requires them to active deceptively in favor of one that will let them operate with integrity. Even if the end goal is the same, eg: to make money.
- gwern 2y ago
  > I'm not saying a commercial motive is a bad thing - hardly... but this quote seems to be odd given the circumstances. It only seems odd to you because you are reading much more into it than he's ever said, like "AI should never be commercialized under any circumstances and it is impossible to do so correctly". Then yes, it would be hypocritical. But he didn't say that and never has; and Anthropic thinks they are doing it right.
  - jacobr1 2y ago
    Also Anthropic, even though it has the same conflict of interest as OpenAI, seems to be addressing safety concerns more earnestly. They are listening to their internal team and innovating in the space (especially in a practical sense, not just future AGI concerns). Massively funding (or at least announcing too) and then ignoring a team is much worse.
- joaogui1 2y ago
  I think the whole situation where they got some serious investment from SBF and then he got indicted pushed them into commercialising their tech so they could have more standard sources of funding
bbor 2y ago
Always trippy for us apocalyptic optimists to read coverage about safety concerns and consolidating power in AI firms that reads exactly like these companies have been reporting for 20 years for smart phone apps, B2B SASS battles, and hospitality industry schemes. Reminds me of today's articles on the escalating war involving at least one nuclear power mentioning the Dow Jones as the fourth bullet point, but on an even larger and more ridiculous scale. Godspeed to Anthropic! Hopefully they can be a force for good, despite the various deals with the devil that they've taken. They've lost so many safety and e/acc people that I was getting dubious, but they certainly are staying in the fight. Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :)
- throwup238 2y ago
  > Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :) Anthropic is legally a Delaware Public Benefit corporation so it's written into their corporate governance. How effective that governance will be at balancing the public benefit with profit remains to be seen, but it's a lot more than just a pinky promise.
  - bbor 2y ago
    Thanks for the correction! I was mixing up "Public Benefit Corporation", which is a legal offering by state governments, and "B-Corp", which is a non-profit that certifies wholesome for-profit firms like the Tillamook Dairy Cooperative. I'd stand by the general assertion that it's little more than a pinky promise because they merely have to "balance" the concerns according to "any reasonable person"--an extremely weak-seeming obligation to this non-lawyer--but it's certainly much more impactful than I thought, namely: Sections 365 (b) and (c) provide broad protection to directors of public benefit corporations against claims based on interests other than those of stockholders https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=22350 https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=2235... Good on you, Anthropic! In this specific case I believe in the director(s) a lot more than I believe in the shareholders ethics-wise, so it seems like a perfect choice. They can always fire him/them I suppose, but truly catastrophic AI risks would move faster than that, anyway.
conshama 2y ago
Seems to me that the only difference between Anthropic and OpenAI is that Anthropic was for-profit from day one and OpenAI is from day yesterday. I pay for both, and pretty sure they will do everything they can to take as much money from me that they can get away with. This shouldnt be news.
- m463 2y ago
  What if your city police force or volunteer firemen switched to for-profit? I think that is the crux of the matter.
  - astrange 2y ago
    The US is unique in how many public services it has. Other countries have private firefighter services; that just means the city has a contract with them. It doesn't mean they burn your house down and charge you for it.
    - m463 2y ago
      maybe a better analogy would be: People set up and fund a public bus system that has coverage for all neighborhoods, rich or poor, distant or close. And then after the bus system is up and running, the bus system manager decides transportation is important! He IPOs the bus system, and changes all the routes to money-making routes with cost optimized (higher) fares.
      - astrange 2y ago
        See, one reason it doesn't matter if the public directly owns a bus system is that you can just pass laws telling them what routes they have to run. But also, a money-making bus system would mean people actually use it. Nobody uses most American bus systems because they don't go anywhere, and they're slower when they do because they aren't popular enough to replace car traffic.
  - ipaddr 2y ago
    If they started paying volunteer it would tell me the town has more money not they will do a bad job now that they are paid.
scop 2y ago
As somebody new to Claude, can anybody give me tips for how to optimally use Claude as opposed to habits formed with ChatGPT? For example, my main concern is the limiting of messages over a given time period, even for paid accounts. I have often used ChatGPT for very specific questions/answers, but sending a large collection of "drill-down" follow up questions can burn through my Claude messages pretty quickly? Is it as simple as composing longer, more fleshed out prompts to begin with (addressing follow ups ahead of time?) or is this where something like Projects helps? Thanks for any feedback!
- throwup238 2y ago
  Projects can make it worse because I think the Claude rate limiting is token based. If I fill up a project to >100k tokens, I get rate limited much faster.
- light_hue_1 2y ago
  My tip would be to use openai instead. There's an arms race. Openai was ahead. Then anthropic was ahead. Now gpt4o and o1 are better again. This may change in a few months. I'll miss the projects feature though.
  - logicchains 2y ago
    Gpt4o and o1 are absolutely not better at coding than Claude. They're noticeably worse at following complex, detailed prompts (e.g. a detailed prompt for it to create an application), and often forget details during the conversation (e.g. will revert to an old version of some code it already refactored). o1 is better than Claude for Leetcode hard style coding problems, but the majority of coding work isn't about that, it's about correctly implementing a spec. Plus even o1 will still often fill code with "implemention here" comments, in spite of being explicitly asked to provide a full working implementation.
    - light_hue_1 2y ago
      I write a lot of code with both in multiple languages. o1 is astronomically better than Claude. It's not even a competition.
paxys 2y ago
Mira Murati next?
wswope 2y ago
As much as I dislike OpenAI’s ongoing shenanigans and disdain for their own customers, I tried to sign up for Claude last week. Turns out that Anthropic’s signup flow has been silently broken for months for Firefox users: https://old.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1bq06yz/phone_verification_issues_anyone_else/ https://old.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1bq06yz/phone_ver.... You get the SMS verification code, and you can enter it, but you get a barely visible “Invalid verification code” error message followed near-instantly by a refresh of the page. I reached out to support, but like many others, heard nothing back. This barely-disguised contempt for what should likely be their most valuable power-user base suggests to me that a lot of the recent departures from OpenAI are being driven by push instead of pull, and I’m not convinced that Anthropic will remain a competent competitor in the LLM arms race long-term.
- HelloMcFly 2y ago
  For what it's worth I signed up for Claude on Firefox without issues several days ago. I'm not saying the issue isn't real, but it isn't universal on the browser.
  - wswope 2y ago
    Yeah - I run the ESR version of Firefox, which is probably the root of it, but wide prevalence of people hitting the same issue for so long + the total radio silence from support is what really threw me. At least OpenAI pretends to care by responding with AI-generated pseudohelp…
    - mistrial9 2y ago
      > total radio silence from support the new customer reality, courtesy Google etc..
- hannofcart 2y ago
  I'd like to add to this. I signed up and paid for credits to access their API last weekend. All requests still get rejected saying I don't have sufficient credit. This is despite their dashboard saying that I do indeed have the requisite credits. No response despite reaching out to support. Don't think I have been treated this indifferently by any other service in recent times.
kombine 2y ago
Can anybody suggest a good open source (GUI or terminal-based) app for chatting with Claude Sonnet for those who have API keys? I use those for a neovim plugin to chat given the context of codebase, but I would also like an ability to have a regular chat like in the web interface?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mathrawka 2y ago
  https://pypi.org/project/llm/ https://pypi.org/project/llm/ I use Open WebUI for when I want a website with some more features than a terminal provides.
- jakubtomanik 2y ago
  LibreChat
  - jakubtomanik 2y ago
    https://www.librechat.ai/ https://www.librechat.ai/
OutOfHere 2y ago
Anthropic is a joke of a company. They have all these heavyweight hires, but they make logins so difficult for the user that no chat user in their sane mind would want to use Anthropic. It's as if Anthropic doesn't actually want people using their service. They routinely keep logging me out, also always making me wait for an email confirmation code just to login every time, and it's sickening. They also promise API credits but then don't actually give any.
- piva00 2y ago
  I'm a chat user, hopefully with a sane mind, and their login process might be annoying but doesn't stop me from using it. I get logged out once every 2-4 weeks maybe?
- rsstack 2y ago
  The chat on the website is not their main product... They're selling access to their models to enterprises. As sickened as you are by having to log in to the chat, that's not an indication of their success at training and marketing high-quality models (the only real competition to OpenAI at this point).
  - OutOfHere 2y ago
    > The chat on the website is not their main product Guess what: enterprises are made of people. People like to try things out. If people are not happy with something for their personal use, they most definitely are never going to recommend it to their employer. This is why OpenAI wins. It is in fact one of the factors that sets apart a hyper-successful product from a wannabe.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      Literally every single person I know who’s building anything in AI (dozens of early stage founders) prefers Claude over GPT at this point. The AI emperor will not be the one who has the most consumers logging into product.com to use the chatbot. Compound this with OpenAI’s continuous shedding of, as far as I can tell, every credible researcher… I find your position quite hard to believe, even accounting for the hysterical tone.
modeless 2y ago
Kingma is most notable for writing one of the most cited papers in AI. Actually one of the most cited scientific papers ever published, right up there with the transformers paper if not higher. "Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization" https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980 https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980 I remain astonished that Adam continues to be the most widely used optimizer in AI 10 years later. So many contenders have failed to replace it.
- supafastcoder 2y ago
  I mean, there’s only so many ways to optimize a black box
- LarsDu88 2y ago
  The number of papers that use it exceed the number of papers that cite it probably by 100x!
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  (delete)
  - esafak 2y ago
    That's an architecture, not an optimizer. You can probably use ADAM with KANs. I think you latched on to the transformers in the sentence, but Kingma did not invent those.
- p1esk 2y ago
  In my opinion, he is more notable for inventing a variational autoencoder.
brcmthrowaway 2y ago
I hate the penchant Claude has for abstracting everything into one line functions

162 points by coloneltcb 2y ago

nuz 2y ago

It's exciting to wonder where Anthropic will be in like 5 years time with this incredible momentum

Workaccount2 2y ago
Where society will be...
infinitezest 2y ago
Let's catch up about this together while we're waiting in the breadline.

ulfw 2y ago

Left door, right door

Alupis 2y ago

> Anthropic’s CEO, Dario Amodei, was once the VP of research at OpenAI, and reportedly split with the firm after a disagreement over OpenAI’s roadmap — namely its growing commercial focus. So he's now the CEO of Anthropic, a company selling AI services? Claude is amazing, and we use it's Teams plan here at the office extensively (having switched from ChatGPT since Claude is vastly better at technical material and adcopy writing). But, Anthropic definitely has a commercial motive... no? I'm not saying a commercial motive is a bad thing - hardly... but this quote seems to be odd given the circumstances.

_boffin_ 2y ago
Can you go into more depth why you believe Claude is better @ creating adcopy
- Alupis 2y ago
  In my experience it is better at not sounding like an LLM wrote it, even without being directed to not sound like an LLM. It's better able to find and maintain the desired tone (playfulness, silly, professional, a mixture of, etc) with minor prompting. It also seems better at understanding your business/company and helping craft adcopy that's on-message/theme. We used ChatGPT's Teams plan too with GPT4, but were sold on Claude almost immediately. Admittedly we have not used GPT4o recently, so we can't compare. With technical information, Claude is vastly better at providing accurate information, even about lesser-known languages/stacks. For example, it's ability to discuss and review code written in Gleam, Svelte, TypeSpec and others is impressive. It is also, in our experience, vastly better at "guided/exploratory learning" - where you probe questions as you go down a rabbit hole. Is it always accurate? Of course not, but we've found it to be on average better at those tasks than ChatGPT.
bbor 2y ago
You're absolutely correct that they're a for-profit firm, but you're missing that they were founded specifically over safety concerns. Basically it's not just "commercial motive" in general, it's the sense that OpenAI was only paying lipservice to safety work as a marketing move. For example, here's their research mission: https://www.anthropic.com/research https://www.anthropic.com/research And an example of one of their early research focuses, Constitutional AI: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08073 https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08073
Mistletoe 2y ago
At least Anthropic is honest about their intentions though. That would be enough for me to leave OpenAI. Hey you want to commercialize it sure but don’t hide behind lies.
blitzar 2y ago
Pivoting from "for all mankind" to "all for myself" would make me deeply uncomfortable, too. The change from one position to the other, not either position in any absolute sense, is the concerning part.
- ygjb 2y ago
  I think that the approach that Anthropic is taking to governance is a little different than "all for myself", it's worth having a read of https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-long-term-benefit-trust https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-long-term-benefit-trust It sounds like they are least trying to build on the notion of being a public benefit corporation, and create a business that won't devolve into chart must go up and to the right each quarter. Time will tell of course, OpenAI was putatively started with good, non-profit intentions.
  - freejazz 2y ago
    Does anyone actually believe any of this horsesh*t?
- bbor 2y ago
  This is also a great point. I ranted at length about this when the OpenAI news broke last week, but to cut it short: it's a little troubling to see the company founded on the ethos "for-profit AI work is incredibly dangerous" transition to a for-profit AI firm openly engaged in an arms race. Not just engaged, inciting... https://web.archive.org/web/20230714043611/https://openai.com/charter https://web.archive.org/web/20230714043611/https://openai.co...
- nurettin 2y ago
  > Pivoting from "for all mankind" to "all for myself" Isn't the former already a red flag?
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    No it’s good to try to build tech that helps people. Doesn’t mean such declarations need to be taken at face value, but being baseline-cynical is generally unwarranted, undesirable, and uninteresting.
TiredOfLife 2y ago
As I understand the main disagreement between OpenAI and Anthropic is exactly how much and what is censored.
- CaptainFever 2y ago
  I'm not sure as to what Anthropic means when they mean safety. I remember them doing good, non-censorship work in this field, but I also pay for ChatGPT instead of Claude because Claude is just so censored and boring.
  - jacobr1 2y ago
    Where is Claude more censored than ChatGPT?
    - CaptainFever 2y ago
      For my use-cases, mostly erotica.
heroprotagonist 2y ago
I don't think it's odd. * Acting in accordance with declared motivations is a demonstration of integrity. * Acting towards hidden motivations that oppose your declared motivations is deceptive action. Honest people don't want to lead and be responsible for deceptive action, even if the action is desirable. For these types of people, it is often better to leave a place that requires them to active deceptively in favor of one that will let them operate with integrity. Even if the end goal is the same, eg: to make money.
gwern 2y ago
> I'm not saying a commercial motive is a bad thing - hardly... but this quote seems to be odd given the circumstances. It only seems odd to you because you are reading much more into it than he's ever said, like "AI should never be commercialized under any circumstances and it is impossible to do so correctly". Then yes, it would be hypocritical. But he didn't say that and never has; and Anthropic thinks they are doing it right.
- jacobr1 2y ago
  Also Anthropic, even though it has the same conflict of interest as OpenAI, seems to be addressing safety concerns more earnestly. They are listening to their internal team and innovating in the space (especially in a practical sense, not just future AGI concerns). Massively funding (or at least announcing too) and then ignoring a team is much worse.
joaogui1 2y ago
I think the whole situation where they got some serious investment from SBF and then he got indicted pushed them into commercialising their tech so they could have more standard sources of funding

bbor 2y ago

Always trippy for us apocalyptic optimists to read coverage about safety concerns and consolidating power in AI firms that reads exactly like these companies have been reporting for 20 years for smart phone apps, B2B SASS battles, and hospitality industry schemes. Reminds me of today's articles on the escalating war involving at least one nuclear power mentioning the Dow Jones as the fourth bullet point, but on an even larger and more ridiculous scale. Godspeed to Anthropic! Hopefully they can be a force for good, despite the various deals with the devil that they've taken. They've lost so many safety and e/acc people that I was getting dubious, but they certainly are staying in the fight. Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :)

throwup238 2y ago
> Shame they're already for-profit... But don't worry, they Pinky Promise to be For The Public Benefit :) Anthropic is legally a Delaware Public Benefit corporation so it's written into their corporate governance. How effective that governance will be at balancing the public benefit with profit remains to be seen, but it's a lot more than just a pinky promise.
- bbor 2y ago
  Thanks for the correction! I was mixing up "Public Benefit Corporation", which is a legal offering by state governments, and "B-Corp", which is a non-profit that certifies wholesome for-profit firms like the Tillamook Dairy Cooperative. I'd stand by the general assertion that it's little more than a pinky promise because they merely have to "balance" the concerns according to "any reasonable person"--an extremely weak-seeming obligation to this non-lawyer--but it's certainly much more impactful than I thought, namely: Sections 365 (b) and (c) provide broad protection to directors of public benefit corporations against claims based on interests other than those of stockholders https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=22350 https://www.legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=2235... Good on you, Anthropic! In this specific case I believe in the director(s) a lot more than I believe in the shareholders ethics-wise, so it seems like a perfect choice. They can always fire him/them I suppose, but truly catastrophic AI risks would move faster than that, anyway.

conshama 2y ago

Seems to me that the only difference between Anthropic and OpenAI is that Anthropic was for-profit from day one and OpenAI is from day yesterday. I pay for both, and pretty sure they will do everything they can to take as much money from me that they can get away with. This shouldnt be news.

m463 2y ago
What if your city police force or volunteer firemen switched to for-profit? I think that is the crux of the matter.
- astrange 2y ago
  The US is unique in how many public services it has. Other countries have private firefighter services; that just means the city has a contract with them. It doesn't mean they burn your house down and charge you for it.
  - m463 2y ago
    maybe a better analogy would be: People set up and fund a public bus system that has coverage for all neighborhoods, rich or poor, distant or close. And then after the bus system is up and running, the bus system manager decides transportation is important! He IPOs the bus system, and changes all the routes to money-making routes with cost optimized (higher) fares.
    - astrange 2y ago
      See, one reason it doesn't matter if the public directly owns a bus system is that you can just pass laws telling them what routes they have to run. But also, a money-making bus system would mean people actually use it. Nobody uses most American bus systems because they don't go anywhere, and they're slower when they do because they aren't popular enough to replace car traffic.
- ipaddr 2y ago
  If they started paying volunteer it would tell me the town has more money not they will do a bad job now that they are paid.

scop 2y ago

As somebody new to Claude, can anybody give me tips for how to optimally use Claude as opposed to habits formed with ChatGPT? For example, my main concern is the limiting of messages over a given time period, even for paid accounts. I have often used ChatGPT for very specific questions/answers, but sending a large collection of "drill-down" follow up questions can burn through my Claude messages pretty quickly? Is it as simple as composing longer, more fleshed out prompts to begin with (addressing follow ups ahead of time?) or is this where something like Projects helps? Thanks for any feedback!

throwup238 2y ago
Projects can make it worse because I think the Claude rate limiting is token based. If I fill up a project to >100k tokens, I get rate limited much faster.
light_hue_1 2y ago
My tip would be to use openai instead. There's an arms race. Openai was ahead. Then anthropic was ahead. Now gpt4o and o1 are better again. This may change in a few months. I'll miss the projects feature though.
- logicchains 2y ago
  Gpt4o and o1 are absolutely not better at coding than Claude. They're noticeably worse at following complex, detailed prompts (e.g. a detailed prompt for it to create an application), and often forget details during the conversation (e.g. will revert to an old version of some code it already refactored). o1 is better than Claude for Leetcode hard style coding problems, but the majority of coding work isn't about that, it's about correctly implementing a spec. Plus even o1 will still often fill code with "implemention here" comments, in spite of being explicitly asked to provide a full working implementation.
  - light_hue_1 2y ago
    I write a lot of code with both in multiple languages. o1 is astronomically better than Claude. It's not even a competition.

paxys 2y ago

Mira Murati next?

wswope 2y ago

As much as I dislike OpenAI’s ongoing shenanigans and disdain for their own customers, I tried to sign up for Claude last week. Turns out that Anthropic’s signup flow has been silently broken for months for Firefox users: https://old.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1bq06yz/phone_verification_issues_anyone_else/ https://old.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1bq06yz/phone_ver.... You get the SMS verification code, and you can enter it, but you get a barely visible “Invalid verification code” error message followed near-instantly by a refresh of the page. I reached out to support, but like many others, heard nothing back. This barely-disguised contempt for what should likely be their most valuable power-user base suggests to me that a lot of the recent departures from OpenAI are being driven by push instead of pull, and I’m not convinced that Anthropic will remain a competent competitor in the LLM arms race long-term.

HelloMcFly 2y ago
For what it's worth I signed up for Claude on Firefox without issues several days ago. I'm not saying the issue isn't real, but it isn't universal on the browser.
- wswope 2y ago
  Yeah - I run the ESR version of Firefox, which is probably the root of it, but wide prevalence of people hitting the same issue for so long + the total radio silence from support is what really threw me. At least OpenAI pretends to care by responding with AI-generated pseudohelp…
  - mistrial9 2y ago
    > total radio silence from support the new customer reality, courtesy Google etc..
hannofcart 2y ago
I'd like to add to this. I signed up and paid for credits to access their API last weekend. All requests still get rejected saying I don't have sufficient credit. This is despite their dashboard saying that I do indeed have the requisite credits. No response despite reaching out to support. Don't think I have been treated this indifferently by any other service in recent times.

kombine 2y ago

Can anybody suggest a good open source (GUI or terminal-based) app for chatting with Claude Sonnet for those who have API keys? I use those for a neovim plugin to chat given the context of codebase, but I would also like an ability to have a regular chat like in the web interface?

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mathrawka 2y ago
https://pypi.org/project/llm/ https://pypi.org/project/llm/ I use Open WebUI for when I want a website with some more features than a terminal provides.
jakubtomanik 2y ago
LibreChat
- jakubtomanik 2y ago
  https://www.librechat.ai/ https://www.librechat.ai/

OutOfHere 2y ago

Anthropic is a joke of a company. They have all these heavyweight hires, but they make logins so difficult for the user that no chat user in their sane mind would want to use Anthropic. It's as if Anthropic doesn't actually want people using their service. They routinely keep logging me out, also always making me wait for an email confirmation code just to login every time, and it's sickening. They also promise API credits but then don't actually give any.

piva00 2y ago
I'm a chat user, hopefully with a sane mind, and their login process might be annoying but doesn't stop me from using it. I get logged out once every 2-4 weeks maybe?
rsstack 2y ago
The chat on the website is not their main product... They're selling access to their models to enterprises. As sickened as you are by having to log in to the chat, that's not an indication of their success at training and marketing high-quality models (the only real competition to OpenAI at this point).
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  > The chat on the website is not their main product Guess what: enterprises are made of people. People like to try things out. If people are not happy with something for their personal use, they most definitely are never going to recommend it to their employer. This is why OpenAI wins. It is in fact one of the factors that sets apart a hyper-successful product from a wannabe.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    Literally every single person I know who’s building anything in AI (dozens of early stage founders) prefers Claude over GPT at this point. The AI emperor will not be the one who has the most consumers logging into product.com to use the chatbot. Compound this with OpenAI’s continuous shedding of, as far as I can tell, every credible researcher… I find your position quite hard to believe, even accounting for the hysterical tone.

modeless 2y ago

Kingma is most notable for writing one of the most cited papers in AI. Actually one of the most cited scientific papers ever published, right up there with the transformers paper if not higher. "Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization" https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980 https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980 I remain astonished that Adam continues to be the most widely used optimizer in AI 10 years later. So many contenders have failed to replace it.

supafastcoder 2y ago
I mean, there’s only so many ways to optimize a black box
LarsDu88 2y ago
The number of papers that use it exceed the number of papers that cite it probably by 100x!
OutOfHere 2y ago
(delete)
- esafak 2y ago
  That's an architecture, not an optimizer. You can probably use ADAM with KANs. I think you latched on to the transformers in the sentence, but Kingma did not invent those.
p1esk 2y ago
In my opinion, he is more notable for inventing a variational autoencoder.

brcmthrowaway 2y ago

I hate the penchant Claude has for abstracting everything into one line functions