The Register Home Page

back to article Anthropic delivers Claude 3.5 model – and a new way to work with chatbots

OpenAI challenger Anthropic has delivered its latest model — Claude 3.5 Sonnet — and claimed it outperforms rivals on many tasks. Anthropic delivered the model — the first release of the Claude 3.5 family — with a Thursday announcement in which the outfit claimed higher performance than OpenAI's GPT-4o, Google's Gemini 1.5 Pro …

  1. Rafael #872397
    Unhappy

    Unfortunately...

    "... Claude.ai is only available in certain regions right now. We're working hard to expand to other regions soon."

    1. remainer_01

      Re: Unfortunately...

      The API has wider availability, and there are a lot of clients available. Kagi also provides Claude access.

  2. Neil Barnes Silver badge
    Terminator

    "Certainly. I'd be happy to..."

    The immediate response to the question is verbose and looks like a corporate guidance on how to ask if you want fries with that..

    The correct answer should be: Data for image 1; data for image 2.

    These things are not intelligent and certainly not human, and I rather wish people would stop trying pretend they were.

    1. FeepingCreature

      Re: "Certainly. I'd be happy to..."

      I suspect because the context window is their axis of time, the models learn to use verbosity to give themselves time to think.

      1. sabroni Silver badge
        WTF?

        Re: I suspect because the context window is their axis of time

        ChatGPT say "they're just waffling" but make it sound clever.

        "context window is their axis of time" my arse.

        1. FeepingCreature

          Re: I suspect because the context window is their axis of time

          Seriously, I can link papers on this. Google "Let's Think Dot By Dot". LLMs learn to think inside the filler verbiage.

          Which makes complete sense honestly if you remember how backprop works.

    2. sabroni Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: and I rather wish people would stop trying pretend they were.

      There's a fuck ton of cash in pretending they are useful.

      At the moment, anyway....

    3. Kubla Cant

      Re: "Certainly. I'd be happy to..."

      Judging from what I saw in the video, it's actually "Certainly! I'd be happy to!". Over-use of screamers is generally regarded as the mark of a weak intellect. And don't get me started on the stupid Barbie-voice used by GPT-4o.

      1. cornetman

        Re: "Certainly. I'd be happy to..."

        > Over-use of screamers...

        Not aware of the meaning of this expression and a Google search didn't reveal anything to me. Could you clarify? Are you talking about the use of artificially upbeat expressions?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Plaoriginialism

    Googled "cost per human genome sequencing by year", then clicked images. That exact graph shape showed up 100 times. No risk of being called for plagiarism when you are only spouting common knowledge. And it looks so much better to have a "self" created graph than a copy of one taken off the web.

    Don't be too hard on Claude though, that demo was created by marketing.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Plaoriginialism

      I think that's the point: these systems can automate stuff we do anyway. Imagine this task being given to a student, they'd do pretty much the same thing: seach for information and cobble it together in a presentation. But some of the transformations could be really useful. For example, the plans for our house are a hundred years old and need digitising if we want any work done. This will cost quite a lot if we pay an architect to do what is essentially grunt work.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like